UC-NRLF 


^sseNtrats 


LIBRARY 

OF   THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


Class      S*^^ 

021. 


GENERM 


AI,FRKD  AYRKS  AS  SHYI^OCK. 

(after  WILLIAM    EDGAR    MARSHALL'S    PAINTING.) 

Shylock,  after  the  loss  of  his  daughter,  his  jew- 
els and  his  ducats,  goes  through  the  streets  half 
crazed,  bewailing  his  misfortunes,  when  suddenly 
he  is  halted  by  Solanio  with  :  How,  now  Shylock? 


The  essentials 


OF 


ELOCUTION 


BY 


ALFRED    AYRES 


AUTHOR  OF    "the   ORTHOEPIST,"    "  THE  VERBALIST," 

*'thk  mentor,"   "acting  and  actors,"  etc. 


NEW  AND  MUCH  ENLARGED  EDITION 


Art  is  the  perfection  of  nature.— Sir  Tnoivf  as  Browne 
The  perfection  of  art  is  to  conceal  art. — Quintilian 


FUNK  &  WAGNALLS  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK   AND   LONDON 


1897 


0?3 


Copyright  1886,  by 

FUNK  &  WAGNAI^I^S. 

1897,  by 

FUNK  &   WAGNALI.S  COMPANY. 


Printed  in  the  United  States,  America. 
All  rights  reserved. 


GtHi^^^ 


PREFACE. 


This  is  the  shortest  treatise  on  the  Art  of 
Reading  that  has  ever  been  written  in  the 
English  language  ;  yet,  short  as  it  is,  it  is  of 
more  practical  value  than  are  all  the  others — 
which  is  not  saying  much  in  its  praise,  for  all 
the  others  are  of  no  practical  value  whatever. 

The  mode  of  procedure  herein  recom- 
mended, in  order  to  become  skilled  in  elocu- 
tion, is  wholly  unlike  anything  that  has 
hitherto  found  its  way  into  print.  Yet  what 
is  here  is  older  than  the  oldest  of  the  vener- 
able **  systems  **  that  have  come  down  to  us 
from  former  generations,  for  what  is  here 
dates  back  to  the  time  when  men  began  to 
exchange  ideas  by  means  of  a  spoken  lan- 
guage. Then,  as  ever,  the  sensible  man — 
spoke  he  his  own  language  or  that  of  another 
— spoke  naturally,  and  not  as  the  elocution  of 
the  books,  and  of  most  teachers  of  the  art, 
would  have  us  speak,  for  that  tends  to  make 
only  bow-wowers  and  sing-songers. 

Alfred  Ayres, 

New  York,  March,  1886. 


100796 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/essentialsofelocOOayrericli 


NOTE. 

It  has  been  intimated  that  this  little  book 
owes  its  success  to  the  exceeding  modesty  of 
its  preface.  I  do  not  think  so  ;  I  think  it 
owes  its  success  to  the  fact  that  it  is  just  the 
sort  of  book  its  preface  says  it  is. 

The  matter  I  have  added — An  Essay  on 
Pulpit  Elocution,  A  Plea  for  the  Intellectual 
in  Elocution,  The  Pause — Its  Importance,  and 
A  Critical  Analysis  of  Canon  Fleming's  read- 
ing of  certain  passages  in  Shakespeare  —  will 
make  the  book  much  more  instructive,  pro- 
vided the  student  take  the  trouble  to  decide 
how  far  I  am  right  in  criticizing  the  learned 
Canon.  These  pages  offer  such  a  field  for  the 
practice  of  mental  gymnastics  as  is  seldom 
met  with.  Elocutionists  can  not,  I  am  con- 
fident, be  better  employed  than  in  studying 
them. 

Alfred  Ayres. 

New  York,  June,  1897. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE. 

The  Essentials  of  Elocution 5 

Additional 28 

Deportment 44 

Pulpit  Elocution 47 

A  Plea  for   the   Intellectual  in  Elocu- 
tion       57 

The  Pause — Its  Importance 73 

Studies  in  Emphasis 81 


OFTHG     ' 

UNIVERSITY  ) 
THE 

ESSENTIALS  OF  ELOCUTION. 


Elocution  is  the  art  of  speaking  lan- 
guage so  as  to  make  the  thought  it  ex- 
presses clear  and  impressive. 

This  is  best  done  by  speaking  the  lan- 
guage as  we  should  speak  it  if  the 
thought  were  ours,  and  the  language 
came  to  us  as  we  give  it  utterance. 

If  the  thought  were  ours,  and  we 
extemporized  the  language  to  express  it, 
we  should  never  fail  to  speak  with  "good 
accent  and  good  discretion  ; "  we  should 
never  fail  to  speak  naturally  and  Jntel- 
ligently,  and  consequently  impressively. 

If  this  is  true — and  who  will  question 
it  ? — then  the  first,  the  most  important 


6  THE  ESSENTIALS 

thing  to  be  attended  to  by  the  reader  is 
to  make  himself^  acquainted  .  with  the 
author's  tHought.  If  he  does  not  do  this, 
aridd'o  it  thoroughly  too,  good  reading 
is  impossible — ay,  though  he  may  be  the 
most  learned  of  the  learned  in  orotunds, 
sostenutos,  whispers  and  half-whispers, 
monotones,  basilar  tones,  and  guttural 
tones,  high  pitches,  middle  pitches,  low 
pitches,  and  all  the  rest  of  that  old  trum- 
pery that  has  made  many  a  noisy,  stilted 
reader,  but  never  an  intelligent,  agreeable 
one.  He  that  understands  and  appreci- 
ates his  author  will  instinctively  know 
what  tone  to  read  him  in ;  a  knowledge 
of  gutturals  and  basilars,  of  pitches  and 
whispers,  will  help  him  not  a  whit.  This 
complicated  old  machinery  does  not, 
never  has,  and  never  will  make  anything 
but  mechanical  readers — readers  that,  in- 
stead of  being  occupied  with  the  thoughts 
of  their  authors,  are  occupied  with  the 
sound  of  their  own  voices,  which  is  fatal 


OF  ELOCUTION.  7 

to  the  object  the  reader  has  in  view — 
that  of  interesting  his  auditors. 

Opening  at  random  a  treatise  recently 
published  entitled  "Philosophip  Elocu- 
tion" I  find  in  the  chapter  headed 
"Qualities  of  Voice"  the  following:  "  It 
[the  aspirate]  is  an  impure  quality,  akin 
to  the  guttural  and  whisper,  coming  as 
it  were  between  them,  and  next  in  at- 
tenuated quality  to  the  latter.  It  means, 
properly,  *  sound  emitted  in  rough  breath- 
ings *  or  hissings,  and  is  necessary  as  ex- 
pressive of  violent  passion.  It  then  be- 
comes comparative  excellence  in  the 
interpretation  of  hate^  aversion,  fear, 
anger,  frenzy,  horror,  and  the  like  pas- 
sions. Where  these  rage  intensely  the 
aspirate  added  to  the  guttural,  still  fur- 
ther corrupting  and  vitiating  the  orotund 
or  fundamental  voice,  gives  thereto  that 
vicious,  fiendish  character  expressive  of 
dire  revenge  and  destructiveness,  which 
are  otherwise  inexpressible.   This  quality 


8  THE  ESSENTIALS 

of  voice  may  be  created  as  follows: 
Raise  the  tongue  at  the  root,  high 
toward  the  palate,  obstructing  as  much 
as  possible  the  passage  ;  contract  and 
close  the  glottis  still  more  than  in  gut- 
tural tones ;  make  strong  effort  to  ob- 
struct the  egress  of  air,  while  with  strong- 
est pressure  of  abdominal  dorsal  and  pec- 
toral muscles  it  is  forced  out  through  the 
closed  glottis  and  obstructed  passage. 
Thus,  while  uttering  the  words,  there  will 
be  an  escape  of  air  which  is  not  converted 
into  speech,  but,  driven  out  with  utmost 
force,  accompanies  it  with  harsh  and  hiss- 
ing sound.  This  is  the  aspirate  as  used 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  malignant 
passions." 

It  is  strange  that  intelligent  persons 
can  be  persuaded  to  believe  that  this 
kind  of  "  philosophy  "  ever  has  assisted 
any  one  to  become  a  reader  !  It  is  this 
kind  of  philosophy  that  has  justly  brought 
the  professional  elocutionist  into  great 


OF  ELOCUTION.  9 

disrepute  with  the  members  of  the  dra* 
matic  profession,  who  will  tell  you  that 
they  have  never  seen  a  student  of  elocu- 
tion that  could  act,  that  they  are  always 
unnatural,  and  consequently  unsympa- 
thetic, and  yet  the  facts  are  : 

I  St.  There  can  be  no  good  acting  with- 
out good  elocution. 

2d.  Without  much  study,  and  in  the 
right  direction,  there  can  be  no  good 
elocution. 

3d.  There  is  no  art  that  can  be  taught 
with  more  success  than  elocution. 

The  actor  himself  becomes  a  student 
of  elocution  the  moment  he  asks  himself 
how  a  single  sentence  should  be  spoken. 
Elocution  teachers,  as  a  class,  undoubt- 
edly do  more  harm  than  good  ;  their 
teaching  is  commonly  much  worse  than 
no  teaching  at  all,  but  that  is  not  the 
fault  of  the  art. 

Reading  is  a  difficult  art,  far  more  dif- 
ficult than  most  persons  imagine.  There 


lO  THE  ESSENTIALS 

is  no  art  for  which  a  natural  aptitude  is 
more  necessary.  There  are  many  good 
musicians  to  one  good  reader,  and  many 
good  judges  of  music  to  one  good  judge 
of  reading.  In  the  reader  sound  and 
fury  are  accepted,  by  most  persons,  as 
art,  and  are  applauded  accordingly.  I 
have  heard  but  two  readers — three,  if  I 
count  Fanny  Kemble — that  I  should  be 
willing  to  put  in  the  very  first  rank. 
These  two  were  Mr.  Edwin  Forrest  and 
Miss  Charlotte  Cushman.  There  is,  as 
far  as  I  know,  no  reader  now  before  the 
public  to  be  compared  with  them.  Of 
course  I  have  not  heard  them  all,  and, 
then,  opinions  differ.  Neither  Mr.  For- 
rest nor  Miss  Cushman  ever  left  anything 
to  chance,  to  inspiration,  that  could  be 
settled  beforehand — not  an  emphasis, 
not  an  inflection,  not  a  pause.  All  was 
carefully  considered,  and  for  everything 
they  did  they  had  a  reason. 

I  would  walk  farther  and  give  more 


OF  ELOCUTION.  II 

to  hear  any  one  read  Hamlet's  solilo- 
quy on  death  as  Mr.  Forrest  read  it, 
than  I  would  to  see  any  living  Amer- 
ican actor  play  his  whole  repertory  ;  and 
I  would  walk  farther  and  give  more  to 
hear  any  one  read  the  part  of  Queen 
Catherine  in  Henry  VHI.as  MissCush- 
man  read  it,  than  I  would  to  see  in  her 
best  part  an  actress  that  should  embody 
all  the  excellencies  of  all  the  American 
actresses  of  to-day.  Mr.  Forrest  and 
Miss  Cushman  were  great  players,  and 
what  made  them  great  was  their  won- 
derful powers  as  readers,  as  elocutionists. 
In  all  else  that  goes  to  make  the  actor 
they  have  had  many  a  peer.  They  were 
intellectual  players,  scholarly  players, 
players  that  were  far  beyond  the  appre- 
ciation of  the  great  majority  of  those  that 
saw  them.  This  lack  of  contemporary 
appreciation  was  especially  true  of  the 
popular  estimate  of  Mr.  Forrest,  whom 
the  million  were  inclined  to  think  a  phys- 


12  THE  ESSENTIALS 

ical  rather  than  an  intellectual  acton 
Both  Forrest  and  Cushman  were  close 
and  successful  students  of  Nature,  and 
their  delivery  had  in  it  none  of  the  mere 
noise  and  circumstance  of  declamation. 
Their  minds  were  ever  occupied  with 
the  thought,  the  sentiment  and  spirit  of 
their  author,  never  with  the  tones  they 
employed.  They  knew  that  if  they  suc- 
ceeded in  mastering  their  author,  the 
time,  the  tone,  the  pitch,  and  the  force 
best  suited  to  the  rendering  of  him  would 
all  take  care  of  themselves.  They  knew 
that  any  other  course  of  procedure 
would  result  in  making  their  delivery 
mechanical,  automatic  and  soulless,  in- 
stead of  spontaneous,  realistic  and  im- 
pressive. 

But  I  would  not  be  understood  to  in- 
timate that  it  is  necessary  merely  to  un- 
derstand an  author  in  order  to  read  him 
well ;  I  say  only  that  a  thorough  study 
of  the  language  to  be  read  is  the  first 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


n 


step  to  be  taken,  and  that  what  follows  is 
often  comparatively  easy.*  But  as  there 
is,  when  one  is  not  ill,  a  vast  difference 
between  being  well  and  being  well,  so 
there  is  a  vast  difference  between  com- 
prehending an  author  and  comprehend- 
ing him.  Most  persons  of  any  culture 
think  they  comprehend  Shakspeare,  yet 
there  is  quite  as  much  difference  in  their 
appreciation  of  him  as  there  is  in  their 
appreciation  of,  say  the  paintings  of  the 
great  masters.  How  many  of  the  read* 
ers  of  "The  Merchant  of  Venice" — to 
take  a  very  simple  example — discover  in 
Portia  s  speech  in  the  fourth  act,  begin- 
ning "Tarry,  Jew,  the  law  hath  yet 
another  hold  on  you,"  that  the  law  is 
specially  severe  when  an  alien  attempts 

*  I  assume  that  the  student  of  elocution  knows  his  moth- 
er tongue  sufficiently  well  to  articulate  it  distinctly,  and 
to  pronounce  it  according  to  some  recognized  authority. 
Studies  in  articulation  and  pronunciation  are  properly 
preparatory  to  the  study  of  elocution,  as  an  artt  rathcf 
than  a  part  of  it. 


14  THE  ESSENTIALS 

the  life  of  a  citizen,  and  would  so  empha- 
size the  language  as  to  bring  out  this 
thought  ?  Very  few,  indeed,  as  I  know 
by  observation.  I  once  knew  an  elocu- 
tionist (!)  that  for  years  had  been  getting 
$5  an  hour  for  teaching,  and  had  gone 
over  this  speech  again  and  again  without 
discovering  this  peculiarity  of  the  Vene- 
tian law,  and,  of  course,  without  making 
it  appear  in  the  reading. 

Elocution  cannot  be  learned  from 
books,  any  better  than  painting  or  sculpt- 
ure can.  No  treatise  on  the  art,  no  mat- 
ter how  voluminous  it  is,  can  do  much 
more  than  give  the  learner  a  few  hints  to 
set  him  thinking  and  observing.  After 
having  carefully  studied  the  language  to 
be  read — supposing  that  its  meaning  is 
not  obvious — one  should  proceed  to  de- 
termine how  it  should  be  spoken  in 
order  to  make  the  meaning  clear : 

I  St.  Which  are  the  words  that  should 
be  emphasized. 


OF  ELOCUTION,  1 5 

2d.  Which  the  clauses  that,  being 
comparatively  unimportant,  should  be 
lightly  touched — slurred. 

3d.  Where  the  voice  should  be  kept 
up,  and  where  allowed  to  take  the  falling 
inflection. 

4th.  Where  the  pauses  should  be 
made,  the  longest  of  which  are  always 
made  between  the  thoughts. 

The  tone,  I  insist,  will  take  care  of  it- 
self. Herein  he  that  knows  what  he  is 
reading  about,  he  that  appreciates  his 
author,  will  never  fail. 

In  order  to  execute  well,  practice,  as 
a  matter  of  course,  is  necessary,  and  a 
great  deal  of  practice,  too.  In  practising 
remember : 

I  St.  To  be  chary  of  emphasis.  Never 
emphasize  a  word  unless  you  think  the 
sense  demands  it.  Emphasis  being  only 
relative  stress,  over-emphasis  defeats  its 
object.  Do  nothing  without  a  reason. 
Spare   the   ifsy  the   ands,  and  the   buts. 


•.w'«v--V-vA^ 


1 6  THE  ESSENTIALS 

Do  not  come  down  on  them  as  though 
you  would  annihilate  them,  after  the  fash- 
ion of  many  readers.  The  particles  should 
generally  be  touched  lightly. 

2d.  That  in  slurring  parenthetic  clauses 
— clauses  that  tell  how,  when,  where, 
etc. — we  make  a  slight  pause  before  and 
after  them,  and  speak  them  somewhat 
more  rapidly  and  less  forcibly  than  the 
rest  of  the  text.     Examples : 

"  Speak  the  speech — I  pray  you — as  I 
pronounced  it  to  you." 

"  The  censure  of  the  which  one  must 
— in  your  allowance — overweigh  a  whole 
theatre  of  others." 

"  This  book — as  you  see  by  the  title 
— is  a  prronouncing  manual." 

So,  too,  must  the  particles  and  the 
pronouns,  as  a  rule,  be  touched  lightly, 
after  the  manner  of  good  offhand  speak- 
ers, and  of  cultivated  persons  in  conver- 
sation, except  when  the  sense  requires 
them  to  be  emphatic.     Giving  the  name 


OF  ELOCUTION,  1 7 

sound  to  the  particles  and  pronouns 
— which  necessitates  the  distinct  aspi- 
ration of  the  h's  of  the  pronouns,  a 
thing  that  we  hear  an  occasional  Eng- 
lishman do,  seemingly  to  make  sure  of 
not  being  taken  for  a  cockney — makes 
one's  utterance  stilted,  pedantic  and  self- 
conscious.  Herein  some  of  our  Eng- 
lish actors  are  great  offenders.  There  is 
as  much  difference  between  the  proper 
sound  to  give  to  the  pronouns  and  the 
particles  in  speaking  and  reading  and  their 
name  sounds  as  there  is  between  the  name 
sound  of  the  and  the  sound  we  usually 
give  it  in  conversation.  The  primary 
object  of  reading,  of  reciting,  and  of  de- 
claiming is  not  to  make  our  listeners 
understand  the  words,  but  to  make  them 
comprehend  the  thoughts  the  words  ex- 
press. The  reader  that  sets  himself  the 
task  of  sending  every  syllable  to  the  ut- 
termost corners  of  the  house  is  sure  to 
be  stilted,  automatic,  unnatural,  and  con- 


1 8  THE  ESSENTIALS 

sequently  uninteresting.  If  every  syl- 
lable reaches,  so  much  the  better,  but 
they  must  be  sent  without  apparent 
effort.  Good  taste  limits  clearness  of 
articulation  as  well  as  everything  else. 
Overdoing  in  articulating,  as  in  man- 
ners, is  always  far  more  objectionable 
than  underdoing,  as  nothing  else  is  so 
objectionable  as  self-consciousness  and 
affectation.  An  evident  effort  to  be 
fine  is  a  distinguishing  characteristic 
of  the  underbred  and  the  half-schooled. 
3d.  That  great  care  should  be  taken  not 
to  let  the  voice  die  out,  as  many  readers 
and  players  do,  at  the  end  of  sentences 
and  as  the  breath  leaves  the  lungs.  No 
other  one  thing  is  so  destructive  to  the 
sense,  except  the  old-fashioned  practice 
of  varying  the  tones  in  order  to  avoid 
being  monotonous — a  reproach  that  will 
never  be  made  an  intelligent  reader  that 
is  intent  upon  keeping  his  auditors  occu- 
pied with  the  thought  of  his  author.  Then 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 9 

the  tones  will  change  spontaneously. 
If  the  sentiment  does  not  change  them 
let  them  remain  unchanged.  If  the  read- 
er allows  himself  to  be  occupied  with 
the  tones  of  his  voice,  the  listener  will  do 
likewise,  and  will  soon  become  wearied. 
This  sing-song  manner  of  delivery  per- 
vades nearly  the  whole  German  stage. 
The  German  actor,  jfind  him  where  you 
will,  never,  by  any  chance,  speaks  a  sen- 
tence in  a  natural  tone,  save  when  he 
plays  low-comedy  parts.  No  one  could 
be  more  natural  than  he  when  he  per- 
sonates a  comic  tinker  or  a  comic  cob- 
bler ;  but  when  he  attempts  the  persona- 
tion of  a  man  of  the  better  sort  his 
delivery  is  artificial  in  the  extreme.  Nor 
need  we  hunt  far  to  find,  even  in  high 
places,  on  our  own  stage  those  that  sin 
in  this  direction  quite  as  grievously  as 
the  Germans  do.  This  is  a  style  of 
elocution  that  costs  little  labor,  and 
makes  small  demands  on  the  intelligence. 


20  THE  ESSENTIALS 

4th.  That  in  endeavoring  to  be  natu- 
ral one  must  be  careful  not  to  degen- 
erate into  the  commonplace.  Under- 
doing  is  always  worse  than  overdoing. 
The  worst  of  faults  is  tameness.  The 
happy  mean  between  the  declamatory 
and  the  commonplace  is  often  not  easy 
to  find.  This  is  the  reason  that  we  so 
rarely  hear  certain  passages  in  popular 
plays  satisfactorily  spoken  —  Hamlet's 
advice  to  the  players,  for  example.  How 
beautifully,  how  naturally,  and  yet  with 
what  princely  dignity  Mr.  Forrest  used 
to  speak  these  speeches  ! 

5th.  To  be  deliberate,  to  take  time. 
But  let  your  deliberation  appear  in  the 
time  you  consume  with  your  pauses — 
which,  remember,  when  of  much  length, 
must  be  between  the  thoughts  —  and 
not  in  any  drawling  or  dwelling  on  the 
words,  for  they  must  come  clean-cut 
and  sharply  defined.  Nothing  else  does 
more  to  make  one's  reading  natural  and 


OF  ELOCUTION,  21 

realistic  than  the  proper  distribution  of 
time.  In  extemporizing  we  pause  in- 
stinctively :  to  give  the  listener  time  to 
comprehend,  and  to  prepare  our  next 
thought  for  presentation. 

6th.  That  in  speakin^;_yieJ[angua£e,QL 
others  we  should  seem  to  be  finding  the 
thought  and  the  language  as  we  go  along. 
I  may  say  here  that  no  one,  no  matter 
who,  can  do  himself  full  justice  in  speak- 
ing the  language  of  another  unless  he 
is  as  familiar  with  it  as  he  is  with  his 
A  B  C's.  He  must  know  the  language 
so  thoroughly  that  it  costs  him  no 
effort  whatever  to  recall  it. 

7th.  Not  to  commit  a  selection  to 
memory  until,  by  going  over  it  men- 
tally, you  are  able  to  read  it  mentally 
to  your  satisfaction.  To  memorize  a 
selection  and  then  study  the  reading 
is  "  to  put  the  cart  before  the  horse." 
First  decide  upon  the  form  of  the  utter- 
ance, then,  as  you    memorize,  you  will 


22  THE  ESSENTIALS 

memorize  the  form  as  well  as  the  words. 
Salymi  is  said  to  have  studied  King 
Eear^jix_.y;ears  before  he  made  any 
effort  to  commit  the  part  to  memory. 

8th.  That  untutored  readers  are  al- 
most certain  to  strike  a  higher  key  in 
reading  than  that  of  their  ordinary  tone. 
This  is  a  fault  that  a  little  attention  will, 
in  most  cases,  readily  correct.  An  easy 
way  to  make,  sure  of  striking  a  natural 
tone  is  to  preface  what  one  is  about  to 
read  with  one  or  two  extemporaneous 
sentences,  and  then  to  go  directly  from 
one's  own  language  to  that  of  the  au- 
thor. For  example,  thus:  If  you  will 
listen  I  will  read,  for  your  edification,  I 
hope,  some  verses  by  Alfred  Tennyson. 
They  are  entitled  "  Recollections  of  the 
Arabian  Nights,"  and  begin  by  saying 
that: 

"  When  the  breeze  of  a  joyful  dawn 
blew  free,"  etc.  Nothing  is  easier  than 
in   this  way  to  begin   in  the  tone  one 


OF  ELOCUTION,  23 

habitually  speaks  in.     Then,  after  a  little 
practice,  one  can  forego  the  preface. 

9th.  To  take  braathjoftenj^yerj  often, 
and  to  take  it  inaudibly.  Leave  gasp- 
ing to  "  barn  -  stormers  "  and  prayer- 
meeting  exhorters.  Never  speak  with- 
out having  the  lungs  well  filled.  In 
taking  breath  and  in  speaking  use  the 
muscles  of  the  chest  as  little  as  possible  ; 
make,  if  you  can,  the  diaphragm  and 
abdominal  muscles — the  belly — do  all 
the  work.  Practice  will  make  this  easy, 
and  will  immensely  increase  the  so- 
called  lung  power  for  both  momentary 
and  continued  effort.  If  a  speaker  from 
nervousness  loses  his  voice  he  has  only 
"  to  pull  himself  together,"  take  a  deep, 
full  breath,  and  speak  from  the  abdo- 
men, to  find  his  voice  instantly  return 
to  him.  In  exercising  the  voice  with 
the  view  of  strengthening  it,  it  is  not 
necessary  to  make  much  sound,  but 
only  to   utter  the  words,  or  the  vowels 


24  THE  ESSENTIALS 

only,  with  intensity.  This  can  be  done 
without  disturbing  a  neighbor  in  an  ad- 
joining room.  Voice  is  as  much  the  re- 
sult of  muscular  effort  as  is  the  turning 
of  somersaults,  and  one  should  not  ex- 
pect to  have  the  muscles  with  which  one 
produces  it  well  hardened  and  under 
proper  control  with  less  than  at  least  two 
years'  constant  practice.  No  other  exer- 
cise is  more,  if  equally,  invigorating.  It 
is  not  necessary  to  have  much  voice  in 
order  to  read  well.  A  fragile  person 
with  a  weak  voice,  if  it  is  under  control, 
might  be  very  artistic;  but  a  strong 
voice  and  great  strength  are  necessary  in 
order  to  be  effective,  especially  in  deal- 
ing with  pathos  or  passion. 

Advanced  'pupils  in  schools  can  com- 
monly be  taught  with  considerable  suc- 
cess to  read  naturally  by  giving  them  a 
selection  to  familiarize  themselves  with 
— a  short,  simple  story,  for  example — and 


OF  ELOCUTION, 


25 


then  asking  them,  first,  to  give  the  sub- 
stance of  the  selection  in  their  own  lan- 
guage, and  afterward  the  selection  in  the 
language  of  its  author.  As  soon  as  the 
pupil  begins  to  speak  (or  to  read)  in  a 
high  tone  or  unnaturally  he  should  be 
stopped,  with  the  question  :  "  What  did 
you  say  this  is  about?"  which  will  bring 
him  back  to  a  natural  tone.  Then,  after 
he  has  extemporized  a  few  sentences,  he 
should  be  directed  to  return  to  the  lan- 
guage of  the  book.  One  hour  of  this 
kind  of  drill  will  accomplish  more  than 
a  whole  term  of  wrestling  with  high 
pitches,  low  pitches,  basilars,  gutturals, 
orotunds,  and  sostenutos. 

If  these  hints  suffice  to  make  the  stu 
dent  of  elocution  think  and  observe,  they 
do  about  all  that  any  treatise  can  do  in  the 
way  of  making  readers.  He  that  would 
acquire  the  art  of  speaking  the  language 
set  down  for  him  in  an  intelligent  and 


26  THE  ESSENTIALS 

natural  manner  should  study  the  manner 
of  good  extemporaneous  speakers  and 
of  people  in  earnest  conversation.  He 
should  observe  how  they  emphasize-how 
they  slur  the  unimportant,  reserving  their 
breath  and  strength  for  the  important — 
and  how  they  pause.  Let  him  study  him- 
self, too,  as  well  as  others,  especially  if  his 
manner  is  naturally  earnest  and  animated. 
Whatever  is  even  akin  to  a  drawling,  a 
whining,  an  intoning,  or  a  canting  manner 
of  speaking  he  cannot  too  studiously  shun. 
Natural  tones  are  the  tones  of  truth  and 
honesty,  of  good  sense  and  good  taste. 
It  is  with  them  only  that  the  understand- 
ing is  successfully  addressed  ;  with  them 
only  that  we  can  arouse  and  keep  awake 
the  intelligence  of  the  listener,  which 
is  the  object  we  always  have  in  view, 
whether  we  speak  our  own  language  or 
that  of  another. 

The  only  serious  objection,  I  believe, 


OF  ELOCUTION.  27 

to  the  course  I  recommend  is  that  it 
offers  comparatively  little  opportunity 
for  the  professor  to  impress  his  pupils, 
and  through  them  the  neighborhood, 
with  his  profundity.  In  natural,  com- 
mon-sense processes  there  is  rarely  any- 
thing that  dazzles,  never  anything  that 
bewilders. 


28  THE  ESSEN7YALS 


ADDITIONAL. 

I  WILL  indicate,  as  nearly  as  I  am  able, 
what  I  conceive  to  be  the  proper  read- 
ing of  Portia's  great  speech  in  the 
fourth  act  of  "  The  Merchant  of  Venice," 
giving  some  of  the  reasons  for  the  em- 
phasis. A  careful  study  of  this  speech 
will  give  the  student  of  elocution  an 
idea  of  the  course  it  is  necessary  to  pur- 
sue, and  of  the  thought  required  in  order 
to  determine  how  the  more  difficult 
authors  should  be  read  : 

^  indicates  that  the  word  it  is  placed 
over  should  be  touched  lightly. 

/  indicates  a  place  where  breath 
should  be  taken. 

The  italics  indicate  that  the  word 
should  be  emphasized. 

Portia. — Do  you  confess  the  bond? 

Antonio. — I  do. 

Portia. — Then  must  the  Jew  be  merciful. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  29 

Shylock.— On  what  compulsion   must  I  ?    Tell   me 
that.  ^ 

Portia. — The  quality  of  mercy  is  not  strained./ 

Thoughtless  readers,  who  comprise 
fully  forty-nine  in  every  fifty,  are  sure  to 
make  either  quality  or  mercy y  or  possibly 
both  emphatic,  while  the  thoughtful  read- 
er sees  that  the  making  ofeither  of  these 
words  emphatic  puts  a  meaning  into  the 
line  not  intended.  To  say  that  "The 
quality  of  mercy  is  not  strained  "  is  to 
say  that  some  other  attribute  of  mercy 
is,  or  may  be,  strained — the  quantity, 
for  example.  And  to  say, "The  quality 
of  mercy  is  not  strained  "  is  to  say  that 
the  quality  of  something  else  is,  or  may 
be,  strained.  The  thoughtful  reader  sees 
that  Portia  says  simply  this :  "  Mercy 
doesn't  come  by  compulsion,  it  comes 
of  itself,  it  is  spontaneous,"  and,  having 
seen  this,  he  has  no  difficulty  in  decid- 
ing how  the  line  should  be  emphasized. 

I  will  take,  occasion  here  to  say  that 


30  THE  ESSENTIALS 

when  one  is  in  doubt  about  the  empha- 
sis it  is  an  excellent  plan  to  express  the 
thought  of  the  author  in  one's  own  lan- 
guage, and  then  to  transfer  the  emphasis 
to  the  language  of  the  author  ;  and  also 
that  when  one  has  difficulty  in  speaking 
the  language  of  an  author  naturally,  that 
it  is  likewise  a  good  plan  to  express  the 
thought  in  one's  own  language,  and  then 
to  transfer  the  intonation  to  the  author. 
In  doing  so,  in  endeavoring  to  be  nat- 
ural, colloquial,  one  must  be  very  careful 
not  to  degenerate  into  the  commonplace 
— a  very  common  fault.  Of  the  two  it 
is  better  to  overdo  than  to  underdo,  as 
in  underdoing  there  is  great  danger  of 
being  tame,  which  is  the  worst  of  faults. 

It  droppeth/  as  the  gentle  rain  from  heaven/ 
Upon  the  place  beneath  :/  it  is  twice  blest:  / 

The  thoughtless  reader,  the  reader 
that  has  no  reason  for  what  he  does,  but 
emphasizes  in  a  hap-hazard  fashion,  is 


OF  ELOCUTION.  3 1 

sure  to  say  "  twice  blest,"  intimating  by 
his  emphasis  that  it  has  somewhere  been 
said  in  the  context  that  mercy  is  once 
blest,  as  without  this  statement  his 
emphasis  would  not  be  justified.  We 
should  say  of  a  man  that  has  been  twice 
imprisoned,  in  simply  stating  the  fact : 
"  He  has  been  twice  imprisoned i'  but  if 
we  were  answering  the  question,  "  Has 
he  not  been  imprisoned  ?"  we  should 
instinctively  say :  *'  Yes,  he  has  been 
twice  imprisoned."  In  emphasis,  as  in 
grammar,  it  is  always  the  sense  that 
determines. 

It  blesseth  him  that  gives/  and  him  that  takes  :/ 

Strangely  enough, "  him  that  gives  and 
him  that  takes "  is  the  hap-hazard  way 
of  reading  this  line.     If  the  language 
I  were,  "  The  man  that  gives  and  the  man 
\  that  receives,"  no  one  would  err  in  read- 
ing it 

*Tis  mightiest/ \ti  the  mightiest^/  it  becomes 


32 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


Many  thoughtful  readers  say, "  Might- 
iest in  the  mightiest,"  as  they  say,  "  Heart 
of  hearts."  Their  reasons  for  so  doing 
have  always  seemed  to  me  valueless. 
This  emphasis  seems  to  me  absurd.  Por- 
tia simply  says  that  even  among  the 
mightiest  mercy  is  still  the  mightiest. 
In  this  sentence  among  is  the  word  that 
should  receive  the  stress,  if  in  Shak- 
speare's  mode  of  expressing  the  thought 
in  should  receive  it. 

The  throned  monarch!  better  than  his  crown :/ 

This  is,  probably,  the  line  of  the  whole 
speech  with  regard  to  which  opinions 
most  differ.  M  any  good  readers — -among 
them  my  learned  friend,  Professor  J.  B. 
Roberts,  of  Philadelphia  —  insist  that 
better  is  much  the  most  emphatic  word. 
They  say,  "All  monarchs  have  crowns." 
And  if  they  have!  If  it  had  been  any- 
where said  that  mercy  becomes  the 
throned  monarch,  as  well  as  his  crown, 


OF  ELOCUTION.  33 

then  we  should  say  properly  that  it 
becomes  him  better  than  his  crown ;  but 
this  is  nowhere  said.  Portia  says  that 
the  most  exalted  of  men  are  more  adorn- 
ed by  mercy  than  they  are  even  by  their 
crowns.  It  is  not  more  incorrect  to  say, 
"  Fame  is  better  than  riches,"  than  it  is  to 
say,  "It  becomes  the  throned  monarch 
better  than  his  crown."  Of  the  three 
words  crown  is  perhaps  a  little  the  most, 
and  better  is  certainly  the  least  emphatic. 

His  sceptre/  shows  the  force  of  temporal  power,/ 

The  attribute  to  awe  /  and  majesty  J 

Wherein  doth  sit  the  dread  /and  fear  of  kings  // 

Care  should  be  taken  not  to  run  awe 
and  majesty  and  dread  and  fear  to- 
gether, as  it  greatl)^  lessens  the  effect. 

But  mercy/  is  above /Xh^  sceptred  svidiy  ;/ 
It  is  enthroned  in  the  hearts  of  kings./ 

The  pronoun  it  in  this  line,  as  will 
be  seen,  stands  in  direct  contradistinc- 
tion to  temporal  power  (its  antecedent 


34  THE  ESSENTIALS 

being  mercy),  which  is  enthroned  in  the 
sceptre ;  hence  the  sense  demands  that 
it  should  be  emphasized  ;  but,  owing  to 
the  shortness  of  the  vowel  sound,  there  is 
something  unpleasant  to  the  ear  in  that 
reading.  Substitute  that  in  the  place  of 
it,  and  the  effect  of  the  emphasis  is  very 
different. 

It  is  an  attribute  to  God/  Himself ;/ 
And  earthly  power  /doth  then  show  likest  GocTs/ 
When  mercy  I  seasons  justice,  I  Therefore,  Jew,/ 
Though  justice  be  thy  plea,/  consider  this,/ 
That,  in  the  course  oi  justice  J  none  of  us/ 

Not  "in  th^  course  of  justice,"  as  many- 
thoughtless  readers  would  have  it.  The 
words  the  course  of  are  not  at  all  neces- 
sary to  the  sense;  the  line  is  fully  as 
forcible  without  them. 

Should  see  salvation./    We  do  pray/  for  mercy,/ 
And  that  same  prayer/  doth  teach  us  all/  to  render 
The  deeds  of  mercy./     I  have  spoke  thus  much,/ 

Not  "  I  have  spoke  thus  much,"  which 
is  equivalent  to  saying, "  I  have  not 
chanted  it  nor  sung  it.'' 


OF  ELOCUTION.  35 

To  mitigate  the  Justice/  of  thy  plea  ;/ 

Which,/  if  ihoM  follow,/  this  strict  court  of  Venice/ 

See  what  has  been  said  about  the  slur- 
ring of  parenthetic  clauses. 

Must  needs  give  sentence/  'gainst/  the  merchant  there. 

The  voice  should  be  kept  well  up  to 
the  very  end  of  the  last  line,  in  order  to 
make  the  proper  climax. 

As  for  the  measure,  in  reading  verse, 
especially  blank-verse,  it  is  generally  bet- 
ter to  leave  it  to  take  care  of  itself.  The 
thought  is  the  thing ;  it  is  with  that  that 
we  catch  and  hold  the  attention  of  the 
listener. 

In  the  following  speeches  of  Shylock 
I  mark  the  pronouns,  prepositions  and 
conjunctions  that  I  would  have  touched 
lightly.  To  give  these  little  unemphatic 
words  their  full  name  sound,  as  many 
readers  do,  is  most  unnatural,  and  makes 
one's  reading  sound  very  like  a  Conos- 


36  THE  ESSENTIALS 

toga  wagon  going  over  a  corduroy  road. 
By  tripping  over  the  unimportant  we 
bring  the  important  into  the  foreground, 
which  makes  it  easier  for  the  listener 
to  seize  the  thought.  The  reader  that 
goes  pounding  over  the  words  soon 
becomes  tiresome.  The  only  extempo- 
rizers  that  speak  in  this  manner  are  those 
that  endeavor  to  make  up  in  clatter  what 
they  lack  in  matter. 

I  have  possessed  your  grace  of  what  I  purpose  ; 
And  by  our  holy  Sabbath  have  I  sworn 
To  have  the  due  and  forfeit  of  my  bond. 
If  you  deny  it,  let  the  danger  light 
Upon  your  charter  and  your  city's  freedom. 
You'll  ask  me,  why  I  rather  choose  to  have 
A  weight  of  carrion  flesh  than  to  receive 
Three  thousand  ducats  : — I'll  not  answer  that : 
But  say,  it  is  my  humor  :  is  it  answered  ? 
What  if  my  house  be  troubled  with  a  rat, 
And  I  be  pleased  to  give  ten  thousand  ducats 
To  have  it  baned  ;  what,  are  you  answered  yet? 
Some  men  there  are  love  not  a  gaping  pig ; 
Some,  that  are  mad  if  they  behold  a  cat. 
Now  for  your  answer  : 
As  there  is  no  firm  reason  to  be  rendered 
Why  he  cannot  abide  a  gaping  pig  ; 
Why  he,  a  harmless  necessary  cat ; 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


37 


So  can  I  give  no  reason,  nor  will  I  not, 

More  than  a  lodged  hate  and  a  certain  loathing 

I  bear  Antonio,  that  I  follow  thus 

A  losing  suit  against  him.     Are  you  answered  ? 

Duke. — How  shalt  thou   hope   for  mercy,  rend'ring 
none? 

Shy. — What  judgment  shall  I  dread,  doing  no  wrong  ? 
You  have  among  you  many  a  purchased  slave, 
Which,  like  your  asses,  and  your  dogs,  and  mules, 
You  use  in  abject  and  in  slavish  parts. 
Because  you  bought  them  :  shall  I  say  to  you. 
Let  them  be  free,  marry  them  to  your  heirs  ? 
Why  sweat  they  under  their  burdens  ?  let  their  beds 
Be  made  as  soft  as  yours,  let  their  palates 
Be  seasoned  with  such  viands  ?  you  will  answer, 
The  slaves  are  ours  : — So  do  I  answer  you  : 
The  pound  of  flesh  that  I  demand  of  him 
Is  dearly  bought,  is  mine,  and  I  will  have  it : 
If  you  deny  me,  fie  upon  your  law  ! 
There  is  no  force  in  the  decrees  of  Venice  : 
I  stand  for  judgment : — answer  :  shall  I  have  it? 


When  not  emphatic  the  h  in  all  the 
pronouns  beginning  with  that  letter 
should  be  touched  very  lightly.  In  con- 
versation initial  k  is  frequently  dropped 
entirely,  in  the  pronouns,  by  those  whose 
articulation  is  least  faulty.  There  are  not 
a  few,  however,  that,  when  they  appear 


38  THE  ESSENTIALS 

in  public  and  are  "on  their  mettle,"  studi- 
ously avoid  slurring  the  pronouns,  and 
consequently  are  careful  to  aspirate  the 
k  distinctly  in  kzSy  her,  he  and  him,  no 
matter  whether  the  thought  demands 
that  the  pronouns  should  be  emphasized 
or  not;  but  in  their  endeavor  to  be  nicely 
correct  they  simply  succeed  in  being 
pedantically  wrong.  This  error  seriously 
mars  the  delivery  of  many  actors  and 
public  readers,  making  their  elocution 
stilted  and  unnatural.  Many  of  them 
slur  my,  not  unfrequently  making  it  me 
(e  like  y  in  only^,  in  fact,  when  the  y 
should  retain  its  long  sound  ;  but  they 
seem  to  think  it  would  be  a  heinous 
offence  to  treat  the  other  pronouns  in  a 
like  manner.  Pronouns  in  which  the 
letters  should  have  their  full  value  are 
m.et  with  only  at  considerable  intervals. 

When,  from  being  used  in  contradis- 
tinction to  another  personal  pronoun,  ;;^jK 
is  emphatic,  the  y  has  its  full,  open,  long-/ 


OF  ELOCUTION.  39 

sound  Thus  we  should  say,  "Is  this  my 
ink  or  yours  f  But  when  there  is  no 
such  emphasis — and  there  is  but  rarely — 
the  y  has  the  sound  of  obscure  i,  as  in 
mi-nute  and  miraculous,  which  is  very 
like  the  sound  of  y  in  m^any,  only,  etc. 
**  My  \me\  ink  is  as  bad  as  my  \me\penr 
These  rules,  however,  are  and  should  be 
departed  from  in  certain  cases  where  we 
would  express  respect  or  emotion.  "  My 
\mi\  brother  shall  know  of  this."  "  Sir, 
this  lady  is  my  \mt\  wife."  "  Ay,  madam, 
she  was  my  \mi'\  mother!"  Say  me  m 
these  sentences,  and  they  become  com- 
monplace ;  you  take  all  the  soul  out  of 
them. 

"  Hearing  their  \th!r'\  conversation 
and  their  \th'r'\  accounts  of  the  approba- 
tion their  [MV]  papers  were  received 
with,  I  was  excited  to  try  my  \me\  hand 
among  them  \th!m^^r — Franklin. 

"If  their  loss  were  as  great  2iS yours, 
it  would  bankrupt  them  \_lh'my 


^   \  \\  R  A  R  Y 
^/      ^   OF  THE 


40  THE  ESSENTIALS 

"  If  you  give  me  money,  what  are  you 
going  to  give  them  f 

"  If  I  had  them  \th!fn\  now,  I  should 
know  what  to  do  with  them  \tJifn\!' 

Why  ^\^  you  not  come  to  ;;/^when  I 
called  you  ? 

Though  the  name  sounds  of  you  and 
of  me  are  yoo  and  mee  respectively,  their 
proper  sounds  in  the  sentence  above, 
where  they  are  unemphatic,  is  ye  and 
mey  the  e  in  both  cases  having  its  ob- 
scure sound,  which  is  the  sound  that  ter- 
minal y  often  has — any,  many,  nightly 
— and  this  is  the  only  sound  ever  given 
to  these  pronouns,  when  they  do  not 
stand  in  positions  that  make  them  em- 
phatic, except  by  the  pedantic. 

The  name  sound  of  your  is  yoor,  but 
when  it  stands  in  unemphatic  positions, 
as  it  generally  does,  its  pronunciation 
approaches  that  of  the  last  syllable  of 
the  word  lawyer. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  4 1 

hamlet's  advice  to  the  players. 

Speak  the  speech  (I  pray  you)  as  I  pronounced  it  to  you. 
trippingly  on  the  tongue.  But,  if  you  mouth  it  (as  many 
of  our  players  do)  I  had  as  lief  the  town-crier  had  spoke 
my  lines.  Nor  do  not  saw  the  air  too  much — your  hand 
thus  ;  but  use  all  gently  :  for,  in  the  very  torrent ^  iifn- 
pesty  and  (as  I  may  say)  the  whirlwind  of  passion,  you 
must  acquire  and  beget  a  temperance  that  may  give  it 
smoothness,  O,  it  offends  me  to  the  soul^  to  hear  a 
robustious^  periwigpated  fellow  tear  a  passion  to  tatters^ 
to  very  rags^  to  split  the  ears  of  the  groundlings  ;  who 
(for  the  most  part)  are  capable  of  nothing  but  inexplicable 
dumb  shows  and  noise,  I  could  have  such  a  fellow 
whipped  for  o'erdoing  Termagant ;  it  out-herods  Herod. 
Pray  you,  avoid  it. 

Player.     I  warrant  your  honor. 

Be  not  too  tame,  neither  ;  but  let  your  own  discretion 
be  your  tutor.  Suit  the  action  to  the  word^  the  word  to 
the  action  ;  with  this  special  observance,  that  you  o'erstep 
not  the  modesty  of  nature ;  for  anything  so  overdone  is 
from  the  purpose  of  playing,  whose  end^  both  at  the  first 
and  nowy  was  and  is,  to  hold  (as  'twere)  the  mirror  up  to 
nature  :  to  show  virtue  her  own  feature,  scorn  her  own 
image,  and  the  very  age  and  body  of  the  time  his  form 
and  pressure.  Now,  this  overdone,  or  come  tardy  off, 
though  it  may  make  the  unskilful  laugh,  cannot  but 
make  the  judicious  grieve  ;  the  censure  of  the  which  one 
must  (in  your  allowance)  outweigh  a  whole  theatre  of 
others,  O,  there  be  players  that  I  have  seen  play,  and 
heard  others  praise,  and  that  highly  (not  to  speak  it 
profanely),  that,  having  neither  the  «rr^«/ of  Christians  nor 
the  gait  of  Christian,  pagan,  nor  man,  have  so  strutted 


I 


42  THE  ESSENTIALS 

and  BELLOWED,  that  I  have  thought  some  of  Nature's 
journeymen  had  made  men,  and  not  made  them  well^ 
they  imitated  humanity  so  abominably, 

SHAKSPEARE. 

HAMLET'S   SOLILOQUY. 
To  be  or  not  to  be — that  is  the  question  : 
Whether  'tis  nobler  in  the  mind  to  suffer 
The  slings  and  arrows  of  outrageous  fortune, 
Or  to  take  arms  against  a  sea  of  troubles, 
And,  by  opposing,  end  them — To  die — to  sleep — 
No  more ;  and,  by  a  sleep,  to  say  we  end 
The  heart-ache^  and  the  thousand  natural  shocks 
That  flesh  is  heir  to — 'tis  a  consummation 
Devoutly  to  be  wished.     To  die — to  sleep — 
To  sleep  ? — perchance  to  dream — aye,  there's  the  rub  ! 
For,  in  that  sleep  of  death,  what  dreams  may  come 
When  we  have  shuffled  off  this  mortal  coil, 
Must  give  us  pause  !     There  s  the  respect 
That  makes  calamity  of  so  long  Hfe  : 
For  who  would  bear  the  whips  and  scorns  of  time, 
The  oppressor'' s  wrong,  the  proud  man's  contumely ^ 
The  pangs  of  disprized  love ,  the  laws  delay. 
The  insolence  of  office,  and  the  spurns 
That  patient  merit  of  the  unworthy  takes — 
When  he  himself  might  his  quietus  make 
With  a  bare  bodkin  ?      Who  would  fardels  bear. 
To  groan  and  sweat  under  a  weary  life, 
But  that  the  dread  of  something  after  death — 
The  undiscovered  country,  from  whose  bourn 
No  traveller  xeXuxviS— puzzles  the  will. 
And  makes  us  rather  bear  those  ills  we  have 
Than  fly  to  others  that  we  know  not  of  ! 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


43 


Thus  conscience  does  make  cowards  of  us  all: 

And  thus  the  native  hue  of  resolution 

Is  sicklied  o'er  with  the/jZ?  r^j/  of  thought ; 

And  enterprises  of  great  pith  and  moment. 

With  M/j"  regard,  their  currents  turn  awry^ 

And  /(S'J'^  the  «flw<?  of  action,  shakspeAre. 

This  soliloquy  should  not  be  spoken 
in  less  than  four  minutes — certainly  not 
in  less  than  three  and  a  half.  Mr.  For- 
rest took  six  minutes — never  less  in  his 
later  years — to  speak  it,  and  his  six  min- 
utes— so  fully  did  he  engross  the  atten- 
tion of  his  listeners — did  not  seem 
longer  than  the  three  minutes  of  many 
others. 

So  much  in  the  way  of  directions ! 
And  they  should  suffice  to  set  the  would- 
be  reader  to  thinking  and  observing, 
and  to  studying  Nature,  which  it  is  as 
much  his  duty  to  copy  in  her  best  forms 
as  it  is  the  painter's  or  the  sculptor's. 


44 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


DEPORTMENT. 


A  WORD,  and  only  a  word,  with  regard 
to  deportment  on  the  rostrum  or  the 
stage. 

The  first  and  most  important  thing 
to  do  is  to  learn  to  do  nothing — to  keep 
still,  to  stand  firmly  on  the  feet,  without 
any  dropping  in  the  hips,  letting  the 
hands  y^//  where  the  attraction  of  gravi- 
tation will  take  them. 

Of  all  the  positions  one  can  take,  this 
one  is  the  most  graceful,  and  it  may 
always  be  held  until  the  demands  of  the 
occasion  necessitate  a  change.  It  should 
never  be  changed  simply  for  the  sake  of 
change. 

Yet  it  is  the  position  least  in  favor 
with  the  tyro.  He  persists  in  fre- 
quently changing  the  position  of  his 
feet,  in  dropping  in  the  hips,  in  putting 


OF  ELOCUTION,  45 

his  hands  behind  his  back,  on  his  hips, 
or  in  his  trousers  pockets ;  in  putting  his 
thumbs  in  his  waistcoat  pockets,  or  in  his 
belt,  if  he  wears  one,  or  in  clutching  his 
sword-hilt,  if  he  carries  one — in  short,  he 
persists  in  doing  everything  but  the  right 
thing,  which  is,  I  repeat,  to  keep  still  in 
the  position  described. 

No  other  one  thing  so  quickly  betrays 
the  novice  as  fidgeting,  and  fumbling, 
and  trying  to  hide  the  hands;  and  no 
other  one  thing  does  so  much  to  make 
one  appear  to  be  master  of  the  situation, 
and  to  make  one's  bearing  dignified  and 
pleasing  to  the  eye  as — repose. 

If  you  would  learn  what  not  to  do 
observe  our  younger  actors — especially 
those  that  come  to  us  from  England. 
They — some  of  them,  at  least — would 
make  a  better  figure  if  their  arms  were 
amputated  at  the  shoulder. 

After  rising  to  read  to,  or  to  address, 
an  assemblage  of  persons,  do  not  be  in 


46  THE  ESSENTIALS 

haste  to  begin.  Always  wait  till  youi 
auditors  are  quite  still.  Your  waiting 
with  composure  will  never  fail  to  im- 
press your  auditors  favorably. 

Be  sparing  with  your  gestures.  Make 
but  few.  The  tyro  generally  makes 
fully  six  times  too  many.  Let  those  you 
do  make  be  made  from  the  shoulder. 
Little  gestures  made  from  the  elbow  are 
meaningless.  Gesture,  if  spontaneous, 
always  precedes  the  word.  Gestures  that 
are  not  spontaneous  are  better  not  made. 


OF  ELOCUTION,  47 


PULPIT  ELOCUTION. 

Of  the  three  places  where  we  hear 
most  public  speaking  and  reading — our 
courts  of  law,  our  theaters,  and  our 
churches — the  place  where  we  hear  the 
best  elocution  is  the  first,  and  the  place 
where  we  hear  the  worst  elocution  is 
the  last.  The  reason  we  hear  the  best 
elocution  in  our  courts  of  law  is  because 
there  the  speakers  are  most  occupied 
with  the  thoughts  expressed  by  the 
language  they  utter,  because  there  they 
are  most  in  earnest,  and  because  there 
they  address  themselves  most  to  the 
intelligence.  Mere  sound  produces  its 
effect  on  the  feelings,  while  reason 
alone  reaches  the  intelligence. 

He  that  habitually  addresses  himself 
to  the  feelings  of  his  auditors  is  sure 


48  THE  ESSENTIALS 

to  become  artificial,  while  he  that  ha- 
bitually addresses  himself  neither  to 
the  feelings  nor  to  the  reason  of  his 
auditors  is  sure  to  become  monotonous, 
and,  indeed,  is  in  great  danger  of  be- 
coming a  mere  mumbler.  In  Metho- 
dist pulpits  we  find  the  best  examples 
of  the  first  class  of  speakers ;  in  Epis- 
copal pulpits,  the  best  examples  of  the 
second. 

No  man's  delivery  can  be  wholly  bad 
if  he  have  thought  to  utter  that  is 
w^orth  the  uttering,  if  he  be  master 
of  the  thought — it  may  not  always  be 
his — and  if  he  be  intent  on  impressing 
his  auditors.  The  extemporizer  is  com- 
monly more  effective  than  he  that 
speaks  a  lesson  conned,  or  speaks  from 
a  manuscript,  simply  because  his  mind 
is  more  fully  occupied  with  the  thought 
as  he  gives  it  utterance.  I  say  commonly 
more  effective,  because  it  is  possible  for 
at  least  some  persons  so  to  cultivate  the 


OF  ELOCUTION,  49 

art  of  delivery  as  to  be  fully  as  effective 
in  the  delivery  of  a  lesson  conned  as 
they  would  be  if  the  whole — thought 
and  language — were  their  own.  For 
all,  however,  this  requires  much  study, 
and  for  some  persons,  no  matter  how 
much  study  they  give  to  the  art  of  de- 
livery, skill  is  impossible.  Some  of 
our  great  players  are  probably  quite  as 
impressive  in  speaking  the  language  of 
their  parts  as  they  would  be  if  the 
thought  were  theirs,  and  the  language 
came  to  them  as  they  give  it  utterance. 
This  accomplishment  they  acquire  by 
availing  themselves  of  the  assistance  of 
the  best  masters,  and  by  studying  Na- 
ture in  her  best  forms.  The  most  ef- 
fective speaker  of  language  this  coun- 
try has  thus  far  produced,  and  one  of 
the  most  effective  any  country  has  ever 
produced,  was  undoubtedly  the  late 
Edwin  Forrest,  who  insisted  that  he 
owed  even  his  wonderful  voice  to  cul- 


50 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


ture.  Mr.  Forrest  was  one  of  the  hard- 
est of  hard  students  in  his  art ;  not  a 
thing  did  he  leave  undone  that  he 
thought  would  in  any  degree  improve 
his  elocution.  In  the  matter  of  pro- 
nunciation, for  example,  he  was  one  of 
the  most  correct  persons  that  have  ever 
spoken  the  English  language.  Therein 
it  was  always  safe  to  take  him  as  a 
guide.  Nor  was  he  less  correct  in  those 
things  that  it  is  necessary  to  pay  atten- 
tion to  in  order  fully  to  bring  out  an 
author's  thought.  His  emphasis,  his 
pauses,  and  the  inflections  were  always 
just  what  they  should  be  to  make  his 
language  impressive. 

Miss  Charlotte  Cushman  was  another 
wonderful  reader.  True,  Forrest  and 
Cushman  were  what  the  world  calls 
geniuses,  but  their  genius,  like  the 
genius  of  most  geniuses,  was  in  a  great 
measure  merely  a  genius  for  close  ap- 
plication.    The  Forrests  and  the  Cush- 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


51 


mans  are  not  more  indebted  to  their 
natural  gifts  than  they  are  to  what  they 
acquire  by  study. 

No  man  can  make  language  thor- 
oughly effective  that  has  not  learned 
how  to  do  it ;  that  is  not  studied  and 
practiced  in  the  art  commonly  called 
elocution,  which  The  Standard  Diction- 
ary defines  as  *' proper  and  effective  oral 
delivery.'*  One  writer  on  the  art  says 
that  elocution  may  be  defined  as  simply 
''the  intelligent,  intelligible,  correct, 
and  effective  interpretation  and  ex- 
pression of  thought  and  emotion  in 
speech  and  action.''  Another  says: 
'*  It  is  the  appropriate  utterance  of  the 
thoughts  and  feelings  presented  in 
written  language."  A  definition  I  pre- 
fer to  either  of  these  is  this  :  *'  Elocu- 
tion is  the  art  of  speaking  language  so 
as  to  make  the  thought  it  expresses 
clear  and  impressive." 

Nor  is  the  utterance  the  only  thing 


52  THE  ESSENTIALS 

to  be  considered ;  the  handling  of  the 
body — ^gestures,  bearing — must  also  be 
considered  if  one  would  be  a  pleasing 
speaker.  Oratory  is  an  art,  and  like 
the  other  arts,  is  largely  acquirable. 
How  many  preachers  know  anything 
about  what  is  called  stage  or  rostrum 
deportment?  How  often  they  appear 
awkward  and  ungainly,  when,  by  follow- 
ing a  few  hints,  they  would  appear  dig- 
nified and  commanding ! 

Much  importance  as  has  been  at- 
tached to  the  art  by  many  persons  as 
far  back,  at  least,  as  we  have  the  his- 
tory of  civilization,  there  is  to-day  one 
class  of  persons,  a  part  of  whose  duties 
is  to  speak  in  public  two  or  three  times 
a  week,  that  appear  for  the  most  part 
to  attach  no  importance  to  it  whatever. 
I  mean  the  preachers.  They,  at  least 
many  of  them,  appear  to  care  not  a 
whit  whether  their  delivery  is  good  or 
bad.     There  are  those  that  think  this 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


53 


comes  of  the  fact  that  elocution  is 
thought  by  many  to  make  the  speaker 
or  reader  unnatural  and  stilted.  I 
think  it  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
many  preachers  are  indifferent,  and  are 
content  to  discharge  their  duties  in  a 
simply  perfunctory  manner.  If  they 
had  the  burning  zeal  of  a  Paul  or  an 
Ulfilas,  of  a  Luther  or  a  Calvin,  of  a 
Massilon  or  a  Whitfield,  they  should  do 
all  in  their  power  to  make  their  deliv- 
ery effective.  In  the  Methodist  pul- 
pits, for  example,  it  is  too  often  the 
fashion  to  vociferate — to  rant,  as  the 
stage  calls  it — with  all  the  physical 
energy  the  speaker  chances  to  possess. 
In  the  Episcopal,  very  many  go  to  the 
other  extreme.  There  they  go  so  far 
in  avoiding  the  vociferation  indulged 
in  by  their  Methodist  neighbors  that 
some  of  them  lose  all  semblance  of 
being  in  earnest.  They  go  through 
the  entire  service,  sermon  included,  as 


54  THE  ESSENTIALS 

though  they  thought  it  quite  "the 
thing '*  to  be  as  monotonous  and  auto- 
matic as  possible.  The  Methodist  ap- 
pears to  think  his  auditors  want  and 
expect  what  the  stage  calls  *' ginger/' 
so  he  howls  himself  hoarse.  The  Epis- 
copalian, on  the  contrary,  appears  to 
think  his  auditors  want  and  expect  pro- 
priety, alias  monotony,  so  he  gives  it  to 
them  in  atone  that  oftentimes  is  hardly 
audible.  Yet  both  Methodist  and  Epis- 
copalian profess  to  have  the  same  mis- 
sion, to  teach  the  same  truths,  to  be 
guides  in  the  same  paths.  It  is,  or  is  sup- 
posed to  be,  the  mission  of  both  to  con- 
vince ;  yet  how  differently  do  they  go 
about  the  compassing  of  the  object  in* 
view !  And  still,  since  there  have  been 
men  to  convince,  they  have  been  con- 
vinced in  essentially  the  same  way;  and 
as  long  as  there  are  any  men  to  convince, 
they  will  be  convinced  in  essentially  the 
same  way.     That  way,  however,  is  not 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


55 


the  way  that  fashion  has  introduced  into 
a  great  majority  of  the  pulpits  of  to-day. 
The  speakers  we  find  in  these  same 
pulpits,  when  they  are  really  intent  on 
bringing  others  to  see  as  they  see,  are 
very  different  in  manner  from  the  man- 
ner they  assume  in  their  pulpits.  Then 
they  talk  like  men.  Then,  they  are 
natural  Then,  the  one  leaves  off  vo- 
ciferating; the  other,  mumbling.  Then, 
they  both  leave  off  intoning.  Then, 
they  make  a  direct,  earnest,  honest, 
manly  appeal  to  the  listener. 

Some  speakers,  I  should  observe, 
resort  to  vociferation,  to  clatter,  to 
make  up  for  a  paucity  of  matter.  He 
that  has  thought  to  present  that  he  is 
really  desirous  to  have  his  auditors 
comprehend,  instinctively  avoids  drown- 
ing it  in  a  sea  of  sound. 

As  I  have  already  intimated,  elocu- 
tion is  looked  upon  with  disfavor  by 
very  many  persons.     The  reason  is  be- 


56  THE  ESSENTIALS 

cause  the  so-called  methods  are  nearly- 
all  bad,  and  because  the  self-called 
teachers  of  elocution,  nineteen  out  of 
twenty  of  them,  are  worse  than  the 
methods.  Elocution,  however,  can  be 
taught,  and  taught  as  successfully  as 
any  other  art  can  be  taught.  But,  be- 
ware, you  that  would  study  the  art — if 
there  be  any  such — into  whose  hands 
you  get. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  if  the  reading 
and  speaking  done  in  our  churches 
were  done  really  well,  from  a  purely 
elocutionary  point  of  view,  the  church 
attendance  would  be  well-nigh  double 
what  it  is.  If  you  want  people  to  go 
to  church  you  must  interest  them,  and 
you  can't  interest  them  by  holloing  at 
them,  or  by  mumbling  at  them. 

The  success  of  a  speaker  before  the 
average  audience  depends  as  much  on 
the  manner  of  the  delivery  as  on  the 
matter  delivered. 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


57 


A  PLEA  FOR  THE  INTELLECT- 
UAL IN  ELOCUTION. 

The  greater  number  of  those  who  think  themselves 
elocutionists  know  no  more  about  elocution  than  a 
catfish  knows  about  astronomy. — ''Thespis'*  on 
Elocution. 

There  are  a  good  many  persons  in 
this  country  that  profess  to  occupy 
themselves  with  the  art  commonly,  and 
properly,  called  elocution.  They  dis- 
agree in  a  good  many  things,  but  they 
all  agree  in  one  thing — that  there  are 
many  persons  in  this  country  that  will 
have  none  of  them  or  of  their  art ;  or, 
to  get  nearer  to  the  matter,  of  what 
they  call  their  art. 

Not  a  few  of  these  artists,  real  or 
only  self-called,  seem  to  be  desirous  to 
do  what  they  can  to  convince  the  world 
that  elocution  is  a  very  good  thing,  and 


58  THE  ESSENTIALS 

hence  a  thing  that  every  one  would  be 
the  better  for  knowing  something  of. 
This  ought  to  be  an  easy  thing  to  do, 
since  elocution  is  nothing  else  than 
good  speaking,  or  perhaps  it  would  be 
better  to  say  it  is  good  vocal  delivery, 
which  surely  is  a  thing  that  no  one 
would  object  to  having, 

There  is  one  thing  more  in  which  all, 
it  would  seem,  are  fully  in  accord ;  and 
that  is  that  to  bring  elocution  "  into 
better  repute  with  the  world,''  we  have 
but  to  make  the  elocution  of  the  elocu- 
tionists more  frequently  elocution.  The 
course  to  pursue  in  order  to  bring  this 
about  is  the  question  on  which,  it  is 
fairly  clear  to  the  observer,  no  two 
think  alike.  One  says:  *'We  should 
be  eager  in  our  desires  and  work  heart- 
ily,'' but  he  doesn't  tell  us  how  to  work 
or  what  to  work  at.  Another  says: 
*'You  must  advance  or  you  will  retro- 
grade," but  she  doesn't  tell  us  what  to 


OF  ELOCUTION.  59 

do  in  order  to  advance.  This  same 
adviser  adds :  '*  I  feel  that  the  diggers 
of  the  earth  who  go  down  deep  have 
better  results  than  those  who  spend 
their  time  in  displaying  what  they 
know*';  but  how  our  adviser  would 
have  us  dig  deep  we  are  left  to  divine, 
hence  the  advice  is  of  doubtful  worth. 
Another  says:  *' First  of  all,  I  think 
that  elocution,  both  in  teaching  and  in 
practice,  will  be  reformed  by  the  light 
of  the  harmonic  principle.'* 

How  the  harmonic  principle  would 
aid  in  determining  just  what  an  author 
would  say,  and  just  how  one  should 
emphasize,  inflect,  and  pause  in  order 
to  make  an  author's  meaning  clear,  we 
are  left  to  find  out  as  best  we  can. 
Here,  perhaps,  we  should  do  well  to 
invoke  the  aid  of  the  principle  har- 
monic. This  same  counsellor  tells  us 
that  we  must  be  in  love  with  the  poetry 
we  attempt  to  interpret,  and  that  the 


6o  THE  ESSENTIALS 

greatest  thing  in  elocution,  as  in  reli- 
gion, is  the  love  of  God.  How  love  of 
God  or  of  poetry  could  possibly  sharpen 
one's  wits  I  cannot  see.  I  have  yet  to 
find  that  the  pious  read  any  better  than 
the  impious,  nor  has  it  ever  seemed  to 
me  that  love  for  the  poetic  betters  that 
discretion  that  Shakespeare  intimates 
is  the  elocutionist's  best  tutor.  Indeed, 
I  have  always  been  under  the  impres- 
sion that  poets  are  commonly  bad  read- 
ers, even  of  their  own  compositions. 
Love  of  poetry  may,  usually  does,  make 
the  reader  earnest,  but  unwhipped  earn- 
estness is  seldom  anything  but  fuss  and 
fury.  Then  we  have  **The  New^Elocu- 
tion,''  **The  New  Dynamic  Reading," 
'*  The  Psychological  Elocution,"  and 
perhaps  some  other  kinds  of  elocution 
that  I  have  never  heard  of.  Whether 
any  one  of  these  various  kinds  of  elo- 
cution is  likely  to  drag  elocution  out 
of  the  slough  of  despond,  in  which  all 


OF  ELOCUTION.  6l 

concede  that  it  at  present  wallows,  is  a 
matter  that  I  have  not  even  an  impres- 
sion with  regard  to,  as  I  have  not  even 
a  vague  idea  of  what  these  various 
kinds  of  elocution  are.  Philistine-like, 
I  have  been  content  to  stick  to  the  old 
sort,  of  which  I  have  still  much  to 
learn.  No  man  should  attempt  the  new 
till  he  has  mastered  the  old. 

And  then  there  are  a  good  many 
persons  who  think,  it  would  seem,  that 
coming  together  and  speaking  some 
pieces  to  one  another  and  clapping  one 
another  on  the  back  and  crying,  Bravo, 
brother !  and  Well  done,  sister  !  whether 
the  pieces  are  well  spoken  or  not,  will 
do  something,  or  should  do  something, 
toward  bringing  elocution  ''  into  better 
repute  with  the  world.**  This,  per- 
haps, will  do  the  business,  but  I'm 
skeptical;  Tm  afraid  it  won't;  I  don't 
see  how  it  can.  On  the  contrary,  this 
sort  of  thing,  it  seems  to  me,  is  shaped 


62  THE  ESSENTIALS 

to  do  harm  rather  than  good.  There 
is  danger  that  it  will  send  the  tyro  home 
distended  like  the  pouter-pigeon,  with 
a  misconception  of  his  own  importance, 
in  which  event  he  is  more  than  ever  in 
danger  of  never  knowing  how  little  he 
knows.  Chest  out  and  chin  ahigh,  he 
says  to  himself:  ''Ha,  ha!  I  read  be- 
fore an  audience  of  experts,  and  they 
applauded !  I  thought  I  was,  now  I 
know  that  lam!  Halleluiah!  Glory 
to  Art  in  the  highest ! ''  No  good  can 
come  of  thinking  one's  self  a  game- 
cock when  one  is  only  a  bantam.  Com- 
monly, we  profit  more  by  being  made  to 
see  our  faults  than  by  being  blinded  to 
them.  Mutual  admiration  societies  and 
air-castle  building  are  very  like  in  what 
they  yield. 

That  elocution  is  a  good  thing,  since 
it  is  nothing  else  than  ''proper  and 
effective  oral  delivery,"  no  one  will 
deny,  though  careless  talkers  often  in- 


OF  ELOCUTION.  63 

veigh  against  elocution  when,  if  they 
would  reflect  for  a  moment,  they  would 
not  inveigh  against  the  art,  but  against 
those  who  profess  to  cultivate  it.  The 
habit  prevails  among  actors  to  decry 
elocution ;  the  less  they  know  the  more 
emphatic  their  disapproval,  yet  an 
actor's  manner  of  speaking,  more  than 
all  else,  fixes  his  status  in  his  vocation. 
So  far  as  we  know,  all  great  actors 
have  not  only  been  great  elocutionists, 
but  they  were  schooled  in  elocutionary 
art  by  teachers  of  high  or  low  degree, 
from  Mr.  William  Shakespeare,  of 
Stratford-on-the-Avon,  to  Miss  Louisa 
A.  Fangs,  of  New  York  on  the  Hudson. 
"And  you,*'  I  imagine  I  hear  a  cho- 
rus of  voices  ask,  *'  have  you  a  way  to 
drag  elocution  out  of  the  slough  in 
which  it  wallows?*'  Oh,  yes,  I  have  a 
way.  Whether  it  be  like  Wolsey's,  a 
sure  and  safe  one,  I  will  not  pretend  to 
say.      The   outcome  of  pursuing  my 


64  THE  ESSENTIALS 

way  would  depend  much  upon  the  in- 
telligence employed  in  the  pursuit. 

It  has  ever  seemed  to  me  that  elocu- 
tion spreads  out  enormously  in  a  di- 
rection whose  domain  the  average  elo- 
cutionist never  deems  it  worth  his  while 
to  explore,  much  less  to  cultivate.  With 
few  exceptions,  so  far  as  I  have  been 
able  to  judge,  the  now-a-day  elocution- 
ists look  upon  elocution  as  being  little 
more  than  a  near  kin  to  gymnastics. 
They  begin,  continue  and  end  with  the 
brawn  side  of  the  art,  and  demean 
themselves,  from  first  to  last,  as  though 
having  got  the  voice-making  machine 
in  good  condition  and  well  under  con- 
trol ;  as  though,  having  possessed  them- 
selves of  the  power  successfully  to  fire 
sound  at  words,  they  have  done  all 
there  is  to  do  to  be  an  accomplished 
elocutionist.  That  elocution  is  an  emi- 
nently intellectual  art — an  art  the  gym- 
nastic side  of  which  to  the  intellectual 


OF  ELOCUTION.  65 

side  IS  as  one  to  many — is  something 
the  elocutionists  make  haste  to  say 
they  know,  while  their  doing  says  they 
know  it  not. 

That  elocution  is  a  highly  intellect- 
ual, and,  consequently,  a  very  difficult 
art,  we  have  evidence  that  amounts  to 
proof  in  the  fact  that,  so  far  as  is  gen- 
erally known,  America  has  produced 
only  two  readers  of  the  first  class.  If 
this  be  true,  as  both  these  readers  have 
been  more  than  twenty  years  dead,  it 
might  be  questioned  whether  or  not 
the  great  majority  of  the  present  gen- 
eration of  elocutionists  have  had  an  op- 
portunity to  learn  what  good  reading 
is.  Really  good  reading,  I  am  sure, 
would  be  a  revelation  to  the  majority 
of  the  more  intelligent  of  them;  the 
less  intelligent  would,  perchance,  re- 
mind us  of  the  Mohawk  that  preferred 
a  colored  lithograph  to  a  picture  by 
Rubens. 


66  THE  ESSENTIALS 

To  those  elocutionists  who  contend 
that  a  course  in  muscle  training,  in 
voice-culture,  must  precede  every  other 
step  in  acquiring  the  elocutionary  art; 
that  it  is  useless  to  try  to  learn  to  read 
until  one  has  trained  the  voice — to  such 
elocutionists  the  field  that  the  real  elo- 
cutionist begins,  continues,  and  ends 
with,  is  an  unknown  realm.  The  verit- 
able elocutionist,  the  elocutionist  that 
recognizes  the  importance  of  cultivating 
the  intellectual  side  of  his  art,  in  his 
teaching,  gives  little  time  to  voice-cul- 
ture, and  that  little  he  gives  grudg- 
ingly. He  knows  that  if  his  pupil  is 
in  earnest,  a  few  simple  hints,  a  direct- 
ing word  now  and  then  will  suffice  to 
enable  him,  little  by  little,  to  strengthen 
the  voice-making  apparatus  and  get  it 
under  control.  He  feels,  he  knows, 
that  to  take  a  pupil's  time  in  putting 
him  through  a  course  of  voice  exercises 
is  to  receive  without  making  an  equit- 


OF  ELOCUTION.  67 

able  return.  He  knows  that  the  pupil 
can  exercise  and  develop  the  voice- 
making  muscles  perfectly  well  without 
his  immediate  aid.  Teachers  that  spend 
time  in  vocal  culture  are  of  the  sort 
that  contrive  to  make  as  many  bites  of 
the  cherry  as  possible ;  that  are  ever  in- 
tent on  making  the  little  they  know  go  as 
far  as  they  can  ;  that  are  always  studying 
to  make  the  simple  appear  complex. 
The  few  things  a  reader  has  to  do,  in 
order  to  read  well,  offer  difficulties  so 
great  that  none  ever  attain  to  excel- 
lence but  those  who  supplement  natural 
aptitude  with  long  and  careful  study. 
I  would  not  be  understood  to  intimate 
that  the  gymnastic  elocutionists  are 
dishonest.  To  censure  them  for  not 
knowing  what  they  never  have  had  an 
opportunity  to  learn,  or  even  to  know 
the  existence  of,  obviously  would  be 
unfair.  Few  of  us  ever  see  anything 
that   is   not  pointed  out  to  us.     The 


68  THE  ESSENTIALS 

fact,  however,  Is  still  a  fact,  that  the 
brawn  side  of  elocution  is  to  the  brain 
side  as  a  pond  is  to  the  Pacific.  Mas- 
tery of  the  gymnastic  side  is  within  the 
easy  reach  of  all. 

Cultivating  the  voice,  moreover,  after 
the  fashion  of  the  tonists  is  a  danger- 
ous thing  to  do.  If  cultivated  after 
their  fashion,  it  seldom,  if  ever,  fails  to 
lead  to  artificiality.  Cultivating  special 
tones  for  this  sentiment  and  for  that 
sentiment,  for  this  passion  and  for  that 
passion,  is  fatal.  The  Murdock  school 
of  elocution  has  done  infinite  harm. 
The  late  Mr.  Murdock  was  not  a  read- 
er ;  he  was  a  chanter.  Keeping  track 
of  the  thought  in  the  tones  of  a  sing- 
songer  is  bothersome.  It  is  always 
safe  to  be  direct  and  honest,  subtle  I  ago 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.  The 
reader  that  thinks  of  the  tones  he  makes 
quickly  becomes  tiresome. 

As  we  can  very  well  judge  of  the 


OF  ELOCUTION.  69 

grade  of  a  man's  culture  by  noting 
what  he  laughs  at,  so  we  can  very  well 
judge  what  an  elocutionist  knows  of 
the  art  he  professes  to  cultivate  by  no- 
ting what  he  applauds.  At  the  first 
meeting  of  the  National  Association  of 
Elocutionists,  in  1892,  a  young  woman 
read  a  selection  from  Shakespeare,  and, 
as  I  thought,  read  badly.  To  my  think- 
ing, there  was  but  one  thing  in  her 
reading  to  commend — earnestness — 
but  the  earnestness,  being  unschooled, 
was  but  little  less  than  fuss  and  fury. 
Yet  the  two  or  three  hundred  experts 
there  assembled  applauded  rapturously. 
Had  the  young  woman  read  well,  artist- 
ically, naturally,  the  fury  and  fuss  would 
have  been  absent.  Would  the  applause 
of  the  experts  have  been  equally  rap- 
turous ?  I  doubt  it,  and  I  doubt  it  be- 
cause I  noted  what,  at  that  convention, 
seemed  most  to  please.  Soon  after  the 
Shakespeare  reading,  a  young  woman 


70 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


of  winsome  mien  read  a  poem  and  read 
it  with  much  intelligence.  She  seemed 
simply  to  have  set  herself  the  task  of 
letting  her  auditors  know  what  it  was 
about,  and  this  she  did  successfully. 
Her  methods  were  direct  and  natural, 
without  any  apparent  effort  to  be  effect- 
ive. I  heard  no  one  at  the  convention 
that  pleased  me  more ;  but  the  im- 
pression she  made  on  me  was  very 
different  from  the  impression  she  seem- 
ed to  make  on  her  auditors  generally, 
for  they  applauded  in  the  most  per- 
functory manner,  and  did  not  call  for 
an  encore,  as  was  their  habit.  Though 
the  young  woman  was  unknown  to  me 
I  sought  her  out  and  said  what  I  could 
to  console  her.  I  have  no  doubt  there 
were  others  in  the  audience — half-a- 
dozen,  perhaps — that  thought  of  the 
two  readings  essentially  as  I  did,  but 
the  few  counted  for  little  among  the 
many.     On  another  occasion,  at  a  re- 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


71 


ception  attended  largely,  if  not  wholly, 
by  elocutionists,  a  young  woman  read 
a  selection  from  Shakespeare,  and  read 
exceptionally  well.  Her  effort  was 
damned  with  faint  applause ;  it  was 
plain  that  she  had  fired  too  high  for 
her  audience.  The  next  number  on 
the  programme  chanced  to  be  a  young 
woman  from  the  West,  who  gave  them 
a  broadly  humorous  character  sketch. 
This,  though  scarcely  within  the  prov- 
ince of  elocutionary  art,  the  audience 
applauded  till  the  windows  rattled. 

All  of  which  goes  to  show  that  our 
elocutionists,  taken  as  we  find  them,  do 
not  know  good  reading  from  bad.  Nor 
will  they  ever  know  good  reading  from 
bad  until,  instead  of  giving  nine  parts 
of  their  attention  to  the  brawn  side 
of  elocution  and  one  part  to  the  brain 
side,  they  give  nine  parts  of  their  at- 
tention to  the  brain  side  and  one  part 
to  the  brawn  side.     Indeed,  if  they  will 


7^ 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


but  properly  take  care  of  the  brain  side, 
the  brawn  side  will  well-nigh  take  care 
of  itself.  Then  we  shall  have  elocution 
that  Is  elocution, .and  elocutionists  that 
are  elocutionists;  then,  and  not  till 
then,  will  elocution  stand  with  the  stage 
and  with  the  world  as  it  deserves  to 
stand. 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


n 


THE     PAUSE— ITS     IMPORT- 
ANCE. 

All  that  is  necessary  in  order  to 
read  well,  is  to  speak  naiutalty,  but 
naturalness  of  all  things  is  the  most 
difficult  thing  to  attain.  Any  one  that 
can  draw  at  all  can  draw  something 
that  would  be  readily  recognized  as  an 
attempt  to  draw  the  human  figure,  but 
to  draw  the  human  figure  so  that  it  is 
true  to  Nature  one  must  be  a  superb 
artist. 

The  most  difficult  thing  to  learn  in 
reading  is  properly  to  distribute  the 
time,  to  be  delibem  to  pause  fre- 
quently and  naturally.  The  accom- 
plished reader  always  takes  plenty  of 
time.  ^  He  that  does  not,  he  that  has-"^ 
tens,  never  seems  to  be  master  of  the 


74  THE  ESSENTIALS 

situation,  to  have  his  task  well  In  hand, 
and  consequently  he  never  Is  as  effec- 
tive as  he  might  be.  Nor  must  this 
deliberation  appear  in  anything  but  in 
the  frequency  and  in  the  length  of  the 
pauses.  It  must  never  appear  in  any 
drawling  or  dwelling  on  the  words ; 
they  must  always  come  clean-cut  and 
jsharply  defined.  Pausing  properly  does 
'more  than  any  other  one  thing  to  make 
one's  reading  natural  and  realistic.  In 
extemporizing  we  pause  instinctively 
to  give  the  listener  time  to  compre- 
hend, and  to  prepare  our  next  thought 
for  presentation. 

The  most  accomplished  and  pains- 
taking reader  does  not  pause  always 
in  the  same  places,  but  the  variation  in 
the  places  where  he  pauses,  and  takes 
breath,  Is  inconsiderable.  Pausing  at 
just  such  places  Is  not  always  so 
imperative  as  is  the  putting  of  the 
emphasis   on    certain  words;   yet   the 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


75 


pausing  cannot  vary  much  without 
materially  affecting  the  delivery,  and 
the  points  indicated  by  experts  for 
making  the  pauses  would  not  differ 
greatly.  It  occasionally — not  infre- 
quently, perhaps  —  occurs  that  the 
reader  pauses  simply  to  take  breath, 
when  so  far  as  the  sense  is  concerned 
it  is  a  matter  of  indifference  whether  a 
pause  is  made  or  not.  If,  however, 
the  breath  is  well  managed,  this  will 
occur  very  rarely.  Breathing  places, 
i.  e.  places  where  the  sense  demands  a 
pause,  are  usually  abundant.  The  un- 
skilled reader  commonly  runs  over  a 
large  percentage  of  them.  In  the  in- 
terest of  force  and  stayjng: power,  the 
reader  should  avail  himself  of  every 
opportunity  the  construction  affords  to 
brea.the.  Sometimes  he  should  breathe 
between  every  word.  For  example: 
"  Bloody,  bawdy  villain  !  Remorseless, 
treacherous,    lecherous,    kindless    vil- 


76  THE  ESSENTIALS 

lain ! ''  He  should  take  breath  five 
times  in  speaking  these  eight  words. 
Nor  is  it  simply  necessary  to  take 
breath  ;  the  breathing  should  be  full 
and  deep.  There  is  always  plenty  of 
time,  if  the  reader  knows  how  to  use  it. 
Pausing  never  makes  a  reader  monoton- 
ous and  tiresome ;  but  dragging  out 
the  words  always  does. 

Being  mindful  of  the  fact  that  an 
ounce  of  example  is  worth  a  pound  of 
theory,  I  submit  two  or  three  speeches 
from  Shakespeare  with  the  pauses,  at 
the  least,  approximately  indicated. 
Pauses  made  with  discretion  vary,  of 
course,  very  much  in  length  ;  some  are 
only  momentary,  while  others  may  be 
measured  by  seconds. 

Here  is  a  speech  in  which  certain 
pauses  are  as  necessary  as  are  any  to 
be  found  in  any  passage  I  can  at  the 
moment  recall ;  and  yet  the  majority  of 
the  Mercutios  I  have  heard  have  run 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


77 


over  them  without  even  the  suspicion 
of  a  halt : 

Ha  !    ha  ! a   dream  ? O,   then 1  see  ! 

Queen  Mab  hath  been  with  you. She  is  the  fairies* 

midwife and  she  comes in  shape no  bigger 

than  an  agate-stone on  the  forefinger  of  an  alder- 
man  drawn   with   a   team    of    little    atomies 

athwart  men's  noses as  they  lie  asleep  ; Her 

waggon  spokes made  of  long  spinners*  legs  ; 

the  cover of  the  wings  of  grasshoppers  ; the 

traces of  the  smallest  spider's  web  ; the  collars 

of  the  moonshine's  watery  beams  ; her  whip 

of  cricket's  bone  ; the  lash of  film  ; her 

waggoner a     small gray-coated     gnat not 

half    so   big as   a   round   little   worm pricked 

from  the  lazy  finger  of  a  maid  ; her  chariot is 

an  empty  hazel  nut made  by  the  joiner  squirrel 

or  old  grub time  out  of  mind the  fairies' 

coach-makers. And   in   this   state she  gallops 

night  by  night through  lovers'  brains and 

then they     dream     on     love  ; o'er     courtiers' 

knees that   dream   on   curtsies    straight  ; o'er 

doctors'  fingers who  straight  dream  on  fees  ; 

o'er  ladies'  lips who  straight  on   kisses   dream  ; 

sometimes she   gallops   o'er   a  lawyer's  nose 

and  then dreams  he  of  smelling  out  a  suit ; 

and  sometimes comes  she  with  a  tithe-pig's   tail 

tickling  a  parson as  he  lies  asleep  ; then 

dreams  he  of  another  benefice  ; sometime 

she   driveth   o'er   a   soldier's   neck and  then 

dreams  he  of  cutting  foreign  throats  ; of  breaches 


78  THE  ESSENTIALS 

—ambuscades Spanish  blades of  healths 

five  fathoms  deep  ; and  then anon drums  in 

his  ears at  which  he  starts and  wakes  ; and 

being  thus  frighted swears  a  prayer  or  two 

and  sleeps  again* 

Hamlet's  advice  to  the  Players 
should,  I  think,  be  paused  substantially 
thus: 

speak  the  speech 1  pray  you as  I  pronounced 

It  to  you trippingly  on  the  tongue but  if  you 

mouth  it as  many  of  our  players  do 1  had  as 

lieve  the  town-crier  spoke  my  lines. Nor  do  not 

saw  the  air  too  much with  your  hand thus 

but  use  all  gently for  in  the  very  torrent tem- 
pest  and  (as  I  may  say)  whirlwind  of  your  passion 

you  must  acquire and  beget a  temperance 

that   may  give   it   smoothness. O,  it   offends 

me  to  the  soul to  hear  a  robustious periwig- 

pated  lellow tear  a  passion  to  tatters to  very 

rags to  split  the  ears  of  the  groundlings who 

for  the  most  part are  capable  of  nothing 

but    inexplicable    dumb     shows and    noise. 1 

would  have  such  a  fellow  whipped for  o'erdoing 

Termigant it  out-herods  Herod. Pray  you 

avoid  it. 

Be  not  too  tame neither but  let  your  own  dis- 
cretion  be  your  tutor suit  the  action to  the 

•^ord— ' — ajid  the  word to  the  action with  this 

special  observance that  you  o'erstep  not  the  mod- 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


79 


esty  of    nature for  anything  so   overdone is 

from  the  purpose  of  playing whose  end both 

at  the  first and  now was and  is to  hold 

as  'twere the  mirror  up  to  nature to  show 

virtue her  own  feature scorn  her  own  image 

and  the  very  age and  body  of  the  time his 

form and  pressure. Now  this  overdone or 

come   tardy   off though   it   makes   the   unskillful 

laugh cannot  but  make  the  judicious  grieve 

the  censure  of  which  one must in  your  allow- 
ance  o'erweigh  a  whole  theatre  of  others. O, 

there   be   players that   I   have   seen  play and 

heard   others   praise and   that    highly not    to 

speak  it  profanely that  neither  having  the  accent 

of  Christian nor  the  gait  of   Christian pagan 

nor  man have  so  strutted and  bellowed 

that  I  have  thought  some  of  nature's  journeymen 

had  made  men and  not  made  them  well they 

imitated  humanity so  abominably. 

I  hope  we  have  reformed  that indifferently 

with  us. 

O,  reform  it  altogether. And  let  those  that  play 

your  clowns speak  no  more  than  is  set  down  for 

them for  there  be  of  them that  will  themselves 

laugh to  set  on  some  quantity  of  barren  specta- 
tors  to  laugh  too though  in  the  meantime 

some  necessary  question  of  the  play be  then  to  be 

considered that's  villainous and  shows  a  most 

pitiful  ambition in  the  fool  that  uses  it. 

In  a  few  instances,  I   have  left  the 
pause   with   which   we    always   follow 


8o  THE  ESSENTIALS 

every  strongly  emphatic  word  un- 
marked. For  example,  we  read  :  That 
will  themselves — laugh — to  set  on,  etc. 
I  aim  not  to  suggest  the  elocution  of 
these  speeches,  but  to  demonstrate  the 
importance  of  the  pause  as  a  part  of 
elocution. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  gj 


STUDIES  IN  EMPHASIS. 
I. 

To  learn  to  read  well  is  the  business  of  half  a  life. 
— Macaulay. 

One  of  the  chief  things  to,  "hf^  at- 
tended  to  in  reading  is  to  give  to  jhe 
individual  words  the  relative  import- 
ance  requisite  to  make  the  thought 
easy  to  seize  by  the  listener.  He  that 
reads  well  trips  lightly  over  a  large  j 
majority  of  the  words.  When  we  in 
any  way  give  prominence  to  a  word  in 
the  utterance  we  are  said  to  emphasize 
it.  To  be  convinced  that  emphasizing 
properly  is  important,  we  have  only  to 
reflect  that  a  change  of  emphasis  often 
changes  the  meaning  of  a  sentence,  or 
suggests  a  thought  in  the  context  that 
is  not  there,     If  we  read : 

It  becomes 
The  throned  monarch  better  than  his  crown,    • 


82  THE  ESSENTIALS 

we  suggest  the  thought  that  the  con- 
text says  that  *'  it  becomes  the  throned 
monarch  as  well  as  his  crown/'  The 
[sense  determined,  there  cannot  be  two 
/equally  good  ways  to  read.  Indeed, 
the  sense  determined,  there  is  never 
but  one  best  way  to  read,  and  this  best 
way  it  is  always  the  reader's  duty  to 
find,  if  he  can. 

The  importance  of  emphasizing  pro- 
perly can  hardly  be  overestimated. 
Professor  S.  H.  Clark,  in  speaking  of 
the  importance  of  being  right  in  em- 
phasizing, says  :  *'  One's  emphasis  is 
the  gauge  of  one's  ability  to  under- 
stand. Whatever  else  a  man  may  be, 
he  is  not  a  reader  if  he  fails  to  empha- 
size correctly.  One  who  emphasizes 
correctly  is  more  than  likely  to  do  jus- 
tice to  his  author  in  other  regards. 
Nothing  else  betrays  our  ignorance  of 
the  text  like  bad  emphasis.  Emphasis 
means  judgment  and  the  judgment  that 


OF  ELOCUTION.  83 

guides  one  to  discreet  and  illuminative 
emphasis  is  more  than  likely  to  lead 
one  to  a  proper  emotional   rendering/' 

In  a  book  recently  published,  entitled 
'*  The  Art  of  Reading  and  Speaking/' 
by  Canon  Fleming,  Chaplain-in-Ordin- 
ary  to  Queen  Victoria,  there  are  some 
forty  pages  given  up  to  selections  from 
Shakespeare  and  Milton  with  those 
words  italicized  that,  in  the  author's 
judgment,  should,  in  the  reading,  be 
emphasized.  There  are  often  words 
emphasized  that  I  should  not  empha- 
size, and  sometimes  there  are  words 
un-emphasized  that  I  should  empha- 
size. 

It  is  not  probable  that  the  Canon's 
reading  would  differ  as  much  from 
mine  as  his  marking  differs  from  mine. 
It  is  often  hard  to  decide,  in  marking 
emphasis,  whether  to  italicize  a  word 
or  not.  In  such  cases,  I  usually  leave 
the  word  unitalicized,  lest  the  italicizing 


84  THE  ESSENTIALS 

prove  misleading.  Over-emphasis  Is 
something  the  reader  should  be  careful 
to  avoid,  as  over-emphasis  may  easily 
be  carried  so  far  as  to  bar  the  effect  of 
the  emphases  that  are  properly  placed. 
Though  neither  the  Canon  nor  I  may 
be  right,  yet  the  study  of  our  marking 
must  tend  to  make  the  student  of  the 
art  of  reading  more  painstaking  than 
he  otherwise  might  be. 

There  are  few  persons — even  on  the 
stage.  In  the  pulpit,  or  on  the  rostrum — 
that  have  any  apprehension  of  the  field 
that  the  art  of  reading  offers  for  the 
exercise  of  the  intelligence.  The  art 
of  delivery,  of  reading,  of  elocution — 
call  It  what  you  will — affords  a  field  for 
the  display  of  as  much  perception  as 
does  any  one  of  the  other  arts.  In 
proof  thereof,  we  have  the  fact  that 
there  are  fewer  persons  that  excel  In 
reading  than  there  are  that  excel  in 
painting  or  sculpture,  not  to  mention 


OF  ELOCUTION,  85 

music,  which  is  the  least  intellectual  of 
all  the  arts,  if  we  consider  only  the 
making  of  sweet  sounds. 

Here  are  some  of  the  lines  in  the 
Canon's  book  with  the  changes  I  would 
suggest  in  the  marking  of  them  : 

1.  Angels  and  ministers  oi  grace  defend  ms  ! 

2.  Be  thou  a  spirit  of  health  or  goblin  damned; 

3.  Bring  with  thee  airs  from  heaven  or  blasts  from 

hell, 

4.  Be  thy  intents  wicked  ot  charitable^ 

5.  Thou  com'st  in  such  a  questionable  shape, 

6.  That  I  will  speak  to  thee.     I'll  call  thee — Hamlet, 

7.  King,  Father,  Royal  Dane  !     O,  answer  m^e^ 

8.  Let  me  not  burst  in  ignorance  ;  but  tell 

9.  Why  thy  canonized  bones,  hearsed  in  death, 

10.  Have  burst  their  cerements  ;  why  the  sepulchrCj 

11.  Wherein  we  saw  thee  quietly  inurned, 

12.  Hath  op'd  his  ponderous  and  marble  jaws, 

13.  To  cast  thee  up  again  !      What  may  this  mean, 

14.  That  thou,  dead  corse,  again,  in  complete  steel, 

15.  Revisifst  thus  the  glimpses  of  the  moon, 

16.  Making  night  hideous  ;  and  we,  fools  of  nature, 

17.  So  horridly  to  shake  our  disposition 

18.  With  thoughts  beyond  the  reaches  of  our  souls? 

19.  Say,    why    is    this  ?     Wherefore  ?      What    should 

we  do? 

The  first  seven  lines  seem  to  me  to 


86  THE  ESSENTIALS 

be  marked  with  good  discretion  till  we 
come  to  the  last  word — Why  empha- 
size me  ?  There  is  no  question  of  the 
Ghost's  answering  anyone  else. 

I  should  not  italicize:  eighth  line, 
neither  not  nor  tell ;  tenth  line,  why  ; 
thirteenth  line,  cast,  what;  fifteenth 
line,  revisit' st ;  sixteenth  line,  night; 
seventeenth  line,  so,  shake  ;  eighteenth 
line,  beyond ;  nineteenth  line,  why  this. 

I  should  italicize  :  eleventh  line, 
quietly !  sixteenth  line,  nature ;  eigh- 
teenth line,  souls  ;  nineteenth  line,  is. 

In  making  three  syllables  of  canton" 
ized  and  two  of  hearsed,  the  learned 
Canon  conforms  to  immemorial  usage ; 
the  rhythm,  however,  is  greatly  bet- 
tered by  making  four  syllables  of  canon- 
ized  2Lnd  one  of  hearsed.  Indeed,  this 
change,  with  the  pause  that  falls  after 
bones,  makes  the  rhythm  well-nigh  per- 
fect. 

Two  of  Canon  Fleming's  readings  in 


OF  ELOCUTION.  87 

the  speech  above  have  been  defended 
thus : 

In  summing  up  Mr.  Ayres  says  of  the  seventh  line 
of  the  speech  beginning  "Angels  and  ministers  of 
grace,"  etc.,  "Why  emphasize  me?  There  is  no 
question  of  the  Ghost's  answering  anyone  else." 

According  to  the  play  there  is  a  very  decided  ques- 
tion of  the  Ghost  answering  some  one  else.  The 
Ghost  first  appears  twice  to  Bernardo  and  Marcellus 
— they  communicate  this  to  Horatio,  and  upon  the 
occasion  of  his  watch  he  attempts  to  speak  to  the 
Ghost.  Horatio  determines  to  inform  Hamlet,  for 
**  this  spirit  dumb  to  us  will  speak  to  him,'* 

Now  when  Hamlet  is  acquainted  with  the  facts  of 
the  Ghost's  visitations  he  determines  to  watch  and 
speak  to  it  though  it  '*  blast  me." 

I  should  think  that  Canon  Fleming's  reading  was 
beautifully  correct,  because  it  takes  notice  of  a  very 
trifling  detail  in  the  speech,  and  it  rather  surprises 
me  that  Mr.  Ayres  should  have  failed  to  grasp  it. 

On  that  little  word  me,  properly  emphasized,  hangs 
a  great  deal  of  the  pathos  and  power  of  Hamlet's 
appeal.  In  that  one  word  is  all  this  meaning  :  You 
have  thrice  appeared  to  these  soldiers,  and  once  even 
Horatio  had  courage  to  address  you,  but  answer  you 
make  not — now  it  is  I,  Hamlet,  your  son,  who  speaks 
to  you,  my  father's  spirit.  "  Hamlet,  King,  Father, 
Royal  Dane  !     O  answer  me.** 

Again,  in  the  nineteenth  line,  Mr.  Ayres  says 
**I  should  not  italicize  why,  this,  in  'Say,  why  is 
thisr** 


^  R  A  \i  Y^ 
jr.         "   OF  THE 

Of       ^,  . 


88  THE  ESSENTIALS 

Hamlet  makes  several  distinct  interrogations  and 
he  sums  up  : 

Say,  why  is  this  ?     Wherefore  ?     What  should  we  do  ? 

Canon  Fleming's  reading  is  most  correct,  because 
by  a  proper  emphasis  of  why  and  this,  the  full  force 
of  the  questions  asked  is  made  sufficiently  impressive. 
Whereas,  if  Hamlet  had  but  asked  one  question, 
then  it  seems  to  me  it  would  have  been  incorrect  to 
italicize  why  and  this. 

To  be  sure,  the  best  authorities  will  always  dis- 
pute many  things  in  Shakespeare,  more  especially 
as  to  the  correct  reading  of  certain  passages,  but, 
after  all,  there  can  be  only  one  that  is  really  correct. 

My  reply  is : 

Mr.  Markley^s  plea  for  the  emphases 
that  he  defends  is,  I  think,  as  strong  as 
it  would  be  possible  for  anyone  to 
make ;  yet  it  is  not  strong  enough  to 
make  me,  ''on  second  thought,''  look 
upon  Canon  Fleming's  emphasis  in  the 
two  instances  that  Mr.  Markley  defends 
as  being  acceptable. 

Canon  Fleming  and  Mr.  Markley 
contend  for,  *'0,  answer  me''  and 
''why  is  this?''  I  contend  for,  ''O, 
answer  me  "  and  '*  Why  is  this  ? '' 


OF  ELOCUTION.  89 

The  least  of  my  reasons  for  not  em- 
phasizing me — which,  if  emphasized  at 
all,  must  be  made  much  more  emphatic 
than  answer- — is  because  the  vowel  of 
me  is  the  most  difficult  of  all  the  vowels 
to  make  emphatic.  This  is  a  consider- 
ation that  counts  for  something  with  the 
reader.  Another  reason — which  is  of 
somewhat  more  importance — lies  in  the 
fact  that  far-fetched  emphases  are  al- 
ways objectionable  ;  they  are  likely  to 
divert  the  auditor's  attentions  from  the 
matter  immediately  in  hand — a  thing 
that  the  player,  the  reader,  and  the 
speaker  should  always  study  to  avoid. 
But  these  are  reasons  of  comparatively 
little  weight ;  the  chief  reason,  the  rea- 
son that  far  outweighs  all  others  for 
my  objecting  to  Canon  Fleming's  read- 
ing lies  in  the  fact  that  the  learned 
Canon's  reading  does  not  express 
Hamlet's  thought ;  does  not  say  what 
Hamlet  wants  to  say,  which  is  this  :  Do 


90 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


not  persist  in  remaining  silent.  Dis- 
close, make  known,  what  your  mission 
is.  Do  not  let  me  burst  in  ignorance, 
but  tell  me  why  you  go  stalking  about 
when  you  should  lie  quietly  inurned  in 
your  goodly  marbled  sepulchre.  The 
whole  speech  shows  clearly  :  ay,  most 
emphatically,  that  Hamlet's  whole  be- 
ing is  possessed  with  the  desire  to  be 
answered  and  not  that  he,  being  the 
Ghost's  son,  has  claims  to  consideration 
that  his  comrades  have  not.  The 
thought  the  Canon's  reading  expresses 
has  the  great  demerit  of  being  signally 
belittling. 

As  for  the  other  reading — why  is  this 
— it  has  not,  to  my  thinking,  a  peg  to 
stand  on.  Hamlet  asks  :  What  means 
this,  what  imports,  what  signifies  this, 
why  is  this — your  going  about  thus,  by 
the  ''glimpses  of  the  moon,  making 
night  hideous."     O,  answer  me  ! 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


II. 


91 


You  speak  the  things  you  should  speak,  but  you 
speak  them  not  in  the  manner  they  should  be 
spoken. — Plutarch. 

The  more  I  study  Canon  Fleming's 
marking,  the  more  am  I  inclined  to 
think  that  his  reading  is  of  the  stiltedi 
ponderous  sort  that  tries  to  get  an  effectl 
out  of  every  word.  Here  is  a  speechj 
of  Cassius*  (Julius  Caesar,  Act  I.,  Sc. 
2)  in  which  the  learned  Canon  italicizes 
double  the  number  of  words  that,  in 
my  judgment,  should  be  emphasized. 
Take,  for  example,  the  line  : 

Brutus  will  start  a  spirit  as  soon  as  Ccesar, 

Read  as  here  indicated,  the  utterance  is, 
it  seems  to  me,  most  monotonous  and 
non-natural,  having  none  of  the  spirit 
in  it  that  pervades  the  entire  speech. 
This  is  an  easy  sort  of  reading.  Any 
one  can  pound  over  words  in  a  trip- 
hammer  sort   of   way,  whereas  to   go 


92 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


lightly  over  the  unimportant  and  to 
dwell  on  the  important  words  with  that 
appreciative  discrimination  that  makes 
the  thought  clear  and  forcible;  that 
causes  the  listener  to  be  occupied  with 
the  matter  rather  than  with  the  manner, 
is  never  an  easy  thing  to  do.  The 
thought,  and  not  the  sound,  is  what 
enlists  and  holds  the  attention  of  the 
listener.  In  the  thought  there  is  never 
any  sameness,  whereas  tones  continu- 
ally recur,  hence  they  quickly  pall. 
The  time  consumed  by  the  two  styles 
differs  but  little,  but  they  distribute  the 
time  very  differently.  The  one  is  the 
style  of  the  brawn  elocutionist,  the 
other  of  the  brain  elocutionist ;  the  one, 

\of  the  reader  that  merely  apprehends 
;iiis  author ;  the  other,  of  the  reader  that 

/fully  comprehends  his  author.  If  we 
read  the  line  I  have  quoted  as  it  is 
italicized  above,  and  then  read  it  thus : 

Brutus  will  start  a  spirit  as  soon  as  Ccesar^ 


OF  ELOCUTION.  93 

we  quickly  see,  or  I  greatly  err,  that  by 
going  lightly  over  three  of  the  words 
our  English  author  emphasizes,  the  ren- 
dering of  the  line  gains  immensely  in 
effect  as  well  as  in  animation. 

Here    is   the    entire   speech   as  the 
learned  Canon  marks  it :  ^ 

1.  Why,  man,  he  doth  bestride  the  narrow  world 

2.  Like  a  Colossus  ;  and  we  petty  men 

3.  Walk  under  his  huge  legs,  and  peep  about 

4.  To  find  ourselves  dishonorable  graves, 

5.  Men  at  sometime  are  masters  of  \.\i^\x  fates  : 

6.  Th.Q  fault,  dear  Brutus,  is  not  in  our  stars^ 

7.  But  in  ourselves  that  we  are  underlings 

8.  Brutus  and  Casar  !  what  should  be  in  that  Ccesar? 

9.  Why  should  that  name  be  sounded  more  thanyours 

10.  Write  them  together,  yours  is  as  fair  a  name  ; 

11.  Sound ih^m,  it  doth  become  the  mouth  as  well; 

12.  Weigh  them,  it  is  as  heavy  ;   conjure  with  them 

13.  Brutus  will  start  a  spirit  as  soon  as  Ccesar , 

14.  iV<77f/  in  the  names  of  «//  the  ^^^j  at  once 

15.  Upon  what  meat  does  />^2V  our  C<:^j«^'  feed 

16.  That  he  is  grown  so  great?    Age,  thou  art  shamed; 

17.  Rome,  thou  hast  lost  the  breed  oi  noble  bloods. 

18.  ^/^^;/  went  there  /5/  an  age,  since  ih&  great  flood, 

19.  But  it  vtSiS  famed  with  ^«^r^  than  <7W^  man  ? 

20.  When  could  M^/  say,  till  now,  that  talked  oi  Rome, 

21.  That  the  ^/^^  w«//j,  incompassed  but  07te  man  ? 

22.  Now  is  it  -^^w^  indeed,  and  r^^w  enough^ 


94  THE  ESSENTIALS 

23.  When  there  is  in  it  but  one  only  man, 

24.  Oh,  you  and  /have  heard  omy  fathers  say, 

25.  There  was  a  Brutus  once  that  would  have  brooked^ 

26.  The  eternal  devil  to  keep  his  j/a/^  in  ^^//^ 

27.  As  easily  as  a  king  ! 

In  these  twenty-seven  lines  one  hun- 
dred and  four  words  are  marked  for 
emphasis,  fifty  more  than  I  should 
mark.  In  the  first  line  I  should  not 
mark  bestride,  narrow,  or  world;  nor  in 
the  second  line  we  men  ;  fifth  line,  mas- 
ters;  sixth  line,  ^^^r,  not;  seventh  line, 
underlings;  eighth  line,  what,  that; 
ninth  line,  name,  Tnore;  tenth  line,  write, 
together,  name;  eleventh  line,  become; 
thirteenth  line,  start,  spirit,  soon;  four- 
teenth line,  7WW,  names,  all;  fifteenth 
line,  meat,  this,  Ccesar;  sixteenth  line, 
so;  seventeenth  line,  lost,  bloods;  eight- 
eenth line,  by,  age;  nineteenth  line, 
faulted,  more;  twentieth  line,  when,  they, 
talked,  Rome;  twenty-first  line,  wide, 
walls;  twenty-third  line,  whe7i,  man; 
twenty-fourth  line,  oh,  you,  I;  twenty- 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


95 


fifth  line,  BrutuSy  brooked;  twenty-sixth 
line,  eternaly  state^  Rome. 

On  the  other  hand,  in  the  third  line,  I 
should  mark  for  emphasis  the  word 
abouty  as  I  think  it  should  be  made  quite 
as  emphatic  as  the  preceding  word.  I 
should  also  mark  feed  in  the  fifteenth 
line  for  emphasis,  and  king  in  the  last 
line. 

Any  one  desirous  to  compare  the 
two  readings  would  do  well  to  copy  the 
speech  and  mark  it  as  I  suggest,  or  to 
mark  it  in  the  printed  page. 

III. 

The  right  word  in  the  right  place,  and  the  right 
emphasis  on  the  right  word. — Dr.  Rush. 

As  I  have  already  intimated,  a  great 
fault,  to  my  thinking,  with  Canon 
Fleming's  reading  is  over-emphasizing. 
This,  I  think,  clearly  appears,  if  we 
study   his   marking   of    the   following 


I 


gS  THE  ESSENTIALS 

scene — the   first   of    the   third  act   of 
*'  The  Merchant  of  Venice  '' : 

Shylock. — How  iiowy  Tubal,  what  news  from  Genoa  ? 
Hast  thou  found  my  daughter  ?  ""'^^ 

At  the  utmost,  I  should  italicize  only 
the  words  now,  Genoa,  and  daugh- 
ter. The  utterance  the  Canon,  if  I 
understand  him,  recommends  is  monot- 
onous and  non-natural. 

Tubal. — I  often  carne  where  I  did  hear  of  her  ;  but 
ca7tnot  Jindh.QX. 

Why  emphasize  came,  did  or  cannot? 
I  fail  to  see  any  reason  for  it.  Hear 
2indjind  are  the  only  words  that  should 
be  made  specially  to  stand  out. 

Shylock. — Why,  there,  there,  there!  A  diamond 
gone — cost  me  two  thousand  ducats  at  Frankfort.  The 
curse  nf;^r  fell  upon  our  nation  till  now.  I  never  felt 
it  till  now, 

I  should  not  italicize  nation  till. 
Though  it  is  Shakespeare,  the  diction, 
I  venture  to  intimate,  is  bettered  by 
transposing  the  words  of  the  next  sen- 
tence, thus:  Till  now^  I  never  felt  it. 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


97 


This  transposition,  if  I  do  not  err,  en- 
ables the  reader  to  make  the  sentence 
more  effective,  for  the  reason  that  it 
puts  the  most  emphatic  word  near  the 
end.  No  one  is  invulnerable — no,  not 
even  Shakespeare.  It  is  questionable 
whether  /  never  should  be  italicized ;  I 
am  inclined  to  think  not. 

Two^Jk^usjiind  ducats  in  that;  and  other  precious, 
precious  jewels  ! 

Neither  ducats  nor  jewels  seem  to  me 
to  be  emphatic. 

I  would  my  daughter  were  dead  at  my  ^oot  and  the 
jewels  in  her  ear.  Would  she  were  hearsed  2X  vay  foot 
and  the  ducats  in  her  coffin. 

There  are  only  four  words  here  that 
I  should  mark  for  emphasis,  the   first 

foot,  ear,  hearsed,  and  coffin.     Passion 

is  cam.m.only~rapid.  Rapidity  would  be 
impossible  if  the  reader  tarried  on  all 
the  words  our  author  italicizes. 

No  news  of  them  !  Why  so  ;  and  I  know  not  whafs 
spent  in  the  search.     Why,  thou  loss  upon  loss  ! 


98 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


The  first  sentence  being  little  else 
than  a  wail,  an  exclamation — a  question 
it  is  not — I  should  make  as  much  of  710 
as  of  news.  Why  so  I  should  treat  in 
like  manner.  I  should  also  emphasize 
the  second  loss.  Know  not  and  spent 
I  should  not  emphasize. 

The  thief  ^ono.  with  so  much  and  so  much  to  ^ndthe 
thief ;  and  no  satisfaction^  no  revenge^  nor  no  ill  luck 
stirring  but  what  lights  o'  my  shoulders  ;  no  sights  but 
o*  my  breathing  ;  no  tears  but  o*  my  shedding  ! 

Nine  of  the  twenty-four  words  here 
marked  for  emphasis  I  should  not  em- 
phasize. In  the  clause:  ''And  so  much  to 
find  the  thief/'  I  should  emphasize  only 
one  vjord— -find.  To  read  it  according 
to  the  Canon's  marking  would  be  to 
drown  it  in  a  sea  of  sound — a  thing  that 
any  fellow  having  a  good  voice-making 
apparatus,  can  do,  whether  he  have  any 
brains  or  not.  I  should  not  emphasize 
the  second  so  much,  the  second  thief, 
the  second  no,  no  ill  lucky  nor  the  two 
succeeding  no's. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  99 

Tubal. —  Yes,  o^^  men  have  ill  lucky  too,  Antonio ^ 
as  I  heard  in  Genoa — 

I  should  not  emphasize  yes  or  ill- 
luck. 

Shylock. —  What,  what,  what?  ill  luck,  ill  luck? 
Tubal. — Hath   an   ^^^osycast  away,    coming  from 
TriJ>olis, 

Argosy  and  Tripolis  seem  to  me  to 
be  the  only  words  that  should  be  made 
at  all  prominent. 

Shylock. — I  thank  God;  I  thank  God.  Is  it  trjie? 
}g^  it  true  ? 

Tubal. — I  spoke  with  some  of  the  sailors  that  ''scaped 
the  wreck. 

I  should,  at  the  most,  mark  sailors 
and  wreck  for  emphasis. 

Shylock. — I  thank,  thee,  goo^  Tubal.  Good  news, 
good  news.     Ha,  ha  I     IVhere?  in  Genoa  1 

The  only  possible  reason  that  I  can 
see  for  emphasizing  the  first  good  is  in- 
sufficient. NewSy  both  times,  and  Ge- 
noa should  be  made  quite  as  emphatic 
as  any  other  words  in  the  speech. 

Tubal. — Your  daughter  spent,  in  Genoa,  as  I  heard, 
one  night,  fourscore  ducats. 


lOO  THE  ESSENTIALS 

I  should  expend  neither  time  nor 
stress  on  spent,  nor  should  I  heed  the 
comma.  The  reader  should  always  be 
on  his  guard  against  expending  his 
breath  where  he  would  get  no  return 
for  it. 

Shylock. — Thou  stick'st  a  dagger  in  me.  I  shall 
never  see  ray  gold  again.  Fourscore  ducats  at  a  sitting! 
Fourscore  ducats  I 

Stick' st  should  surely  not  be  empha- 
sized. I  have  always  read:  ''Fourscore 
ducats — at  a  sitting?''  having  Tubal 
nod  in  answer  to  the  question.  The 
clause  is  commonly  treated  as  an  ex- 
clamation. My  treatment,^  I  think, 
makes  the  clause  much  more  effective. 

Tubal. — There  came  divers  of  Antonio's  creditors  in 
my  company  to  Venice  that  swear  he  ca7inot  choose  but 
break. 

At  the  most,  I  should  mark  for  em- 
phasis creditors,  swear,  and  break. 

Shylock. — I  am  very  glad  of  it.  I'll  plague  him  ; 
ril  torture  him  ;  Vm  glad  of  it. 

The  verji  in  the  first  sentence  is  a 


i 


OF  ELOCUTION.  loi 

superfluity.  More  can  be  made  of  the 
sentence  without  it  than  with  it.  Were 
I  to  speak  the  very,  I  should  touch  the 
glad  comparatively  lightly. 

Tubal. — One  of  them  showed  me  a  ring  that  he 
had  of  your  daughter  for  a  monkey. 

What  a  heartless  little  wretch  Jessica 
is — swap  a  ring  that  was  a  present  from 
her  mother  to  her  father  for  a  monkey  ! 

Shylock. — Out  upon  her  !  Thou  torturest  me, 
Tubal.  It  was  my  torquoise.  I  had  it  of  Leah  when 
I  was  a  bachelor.  I  would  not  have  given  it  for  a 
wilderness  of  monkeys. 

It  not  being  necessary,  in  order  to 
make  the  thought  clear,  to  emphasize 
given  it  is  bad  technique  to  make  much 
of  it.  The  skillful  reader  would  touch 
it  lightly  in  order  that  wilderness  might 
be  made  to  stand  out  the  more  boldly ; 
then  he  would  pause  long  enough  after 
it  to  take  a  deep,  full  breath  which  he 
would  expend  in  a  burst  on  wilderness^ 
thereby  ending  one  of  the  best  short 


I02  THE  ESSENTIALS 

Speeches  ever  written  with   a   telling 
climax. 

Tubal. — But  Antonio  is  certainly  undone, 
Shylock. — Nay  thafs  true^  thafs  very  true.  Go, 
Tubal,  fee  me  an  officer  ;  bespeak  hivm,  fortnight  before, 
I  will  have  the  kcart  of  him  if  h.&  forfeit ;  for  were  he 
out  of  VenicCy  I  can  make  what  merchandise  I  will, 
Goy  Tubal,  and  meet  me  at  our  synagogue;  go,  good 
Tubal ;  at  our  Synagogue,  Tubal. 

I  should  read  :  '*  That^s  very  true/' 
and  '*  bespeak  him  2,  fortnight  before." 
As  for  ify  I  defy  all  the  bellowcution- 
ists  in  Christendom  to  find  a  reason 
worth  a  blade  of  grass  for  emphasizing 
it.  Not  once  in  a  hundred  times  when 
we  hear  this  little  word  mauled  is  there 
any  reason  for  treating  it  other  than 
with  the  greatest  delicacy.  Neither 
merchandise^  meet,  nor  good  should  I 
emphasize,  unless  I  paused  after  me  to 
decide  upon  the  place  of  meeting — 
which  I  always  do — then,  I  should 
dwell  on  meet.  If  this  treatment  was 
intended  by  our  author,  he  should  have 
put  a  dash  after  me. 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


IV. 


103 


**  If  little  labor,  little  are  our  gains  ;  / 

Man's  fortunes  are  according  to  his  pains."      / 

Canon  Fleming  has  given  more 
space  in  his  book  to  **  The  Merchant  of 
Venice ''  than  to  any  other  of  the  Shake- 
speare plays.  He  begins  his  marking 
of  the  fourth  act  for  emphasis  with  the 
Duke*s  speech,  which  he  treats  thus : 

1.  Make  room  and  let  him  stand  before  our  face, 

2.  Shylock,  the  world  thinks,  and  I  think  so,  too^ 

3.  That  thou  but  leadst  this  fashion  of  thy  malice 

4.  To  the  last  hour  of  act ;  and  then,  'tis  thought, 

5.  Thou'lt  show  thy  fnercy  and  remorse  more  strange 

6.  Than  is  thy  strange  apparent  cruelty  ; 

7.  And  where  thou  now  exacfst  the  penalty — 

8.  Which  is  a /^z^«^  of  this /^^r  merchant's  y?(fj^ — 

9.  Thou  wilt  not  only  loose  the  forfeiture, 

10.  But,  touched  YJith.  human  gentleness  and  love 

11.  Forgive  a  moiety  of  X^ixe  principal ; 

12.  Glancing  an  eye  of  pity  on  his  losses 

13.  That  have,  of  late,  so  huddled  on  his  back 

14.  Enough  to  press  a  royal  merchant  down 

15.  And //^^^^  commiseration  of  his  state 

16.  From  brassy  bosoms  and  rough  hearts  oi  flint, 

17.  From  stubborn  Turks  and  Tartars  never  trained 


\ 


I04 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


i8.  To  offices  of  tender  courtesy, 

19.   We  all  expect  a  gentle  answer^  Jew. 

Why  emphasize  stand?  It's  not  a 
question  whether  the  Jew  stand  or  sit ; 
it's  a  question  of  the  place  where  he 
stand. 

In  the  second  line,  the  only  emphatic 
words  are  world,  /,  and  too. 

The  third  line  I  should  leave  un- 
marked. There  is  no  word  in  the  line 
that  in  the  reading  should  be  made 
specially  salient. 

In  the  fourth  line,  I  should  make 
hour  quite  as  emphatic  as  the  other 
emphatic  words.  Act,  possibly,  should 
be  slightly  more  emphatic  than  the 
other  words.  The  reasons,  however, 
would  occupy  too  much  space. 

In  the  fifth  line,  more  should  be 
touched  quite  lightly.  The  thought- 
less reader  never  fails  to  dwell  on  it ; 
not  because  he  has  a  reason  for  doing 
so,  but  because  he  unconsciously  yields 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


105 


to  the  beguiling  influence  of  the  long 
(7,  the  most  sonorous  vowel  in  the  lan- 
guage. 

The  wisdom  of  marking  loose  in  the 
ninth  line  is  questionable.  If  at  all 
emphatic,  it  is  only  slightly  so.  The 
marking  is  misleading. 

The  tenth  line,  read  as  the  Canon 
marks  it,  could,  it  seems  to  me,  not  be 
other  than  very  '*  preachy.**  It  sounds 
to  my  mind's  ear,  as  I  look  at  it,  like 
the  delivery  of  those  that,  instinctively, 
endeavor  to  make  up  in  clatter  what 
they  lack  in  matter.  It  smacks  of  the 
sound-and-fury  sort  of  elocution.  The 
words  touched  and  huma7i  should  not 
be  made  at  all  emphatic.  The  empha- 
sizing of  the  two  words  is  utterly  inde- 
fensible. 

The  emphasizing  of  forgive  in  the 
eleventh  line  is  quite  natural,  and  con- 
sequently proper,  provided  the  reader 
employ  a  persuasive  tone ;  if,  however, 


Io6  THE  ESSENTIALS 

the  tone  be  strictly  judicial,  the  word 
should  come  in  for  no  emphasis. 

In  the  thirteenth  line,  I  should  dwell 
on  so,  making  it,  possibly,  more  em- 
phatic than  huddled. 

There  is  only  one  emphatic  word  in 
the  fourteenth  line — royal. 

The  emphasis  on  pluck  in  the  fif- 
teenth line  is  probably  a  misprint. 

The  three  following  lines  I  should 
read  essentially  thus  : 

From  brassy  bosoms  and  rough  hearts  oi  flint 
From  stubborn  Turks  and  Tartars  never  trained 
To  offices  of  tender  courtesy. 

There  is  no  question  of  the  kind  of 
Turks,  or  Tartars,  or  of  courtesy, 
hence  the  adjectives  should  not  be  em- 
phasized. Take  the  adjectives  out  and 
the  language  loses  none  of  its  force.  I 
think  I  shall  not  be  alone  of  the  opin- 
ion that  the  learned  Canon's  reading  is 
sometimes  rather  ill-digested. 

The  nineteenth   line   is    sometimes 


OF  ELOCUTION, 


107 


read  as  marked,  and  sometimes  read 
without  any  emphasis  on  answer.  Both 
readings  are  defensible.  I  prefer  the 
reading  that  emphasizes  answer. 


V. 


Proficiency  in  the  art  of  elocution,  as  well  as  in  the 
other  arts,  is  the  work  of  time  and  labor. — Bronson. 

Canon  Fleming  continues  to  indicate 
the  emphasis  he  thinks  will  most  clear- 
ly bring  out  the  thought  in  the  fourth 
act  of  **  The  Merchant  of  Venice  *'  by 
marking  the  lines  thus : 

1.  I  have /(^jj-^j-j-^^ your  Grace  of  what  \ purpose; 

2.  And  by  our  holy  sabbath  have  I  sworn 

3.  To  have  the  due  and  forfeit  of  my  bond, 

4.  If  you  deny  it,  let  the  danger  light 

5.  Upon  your  charter  and  your  city' s  freedom, 

6.  You'll  ask  me  why  I  rather  choose  to  have 

7.  A  weight  of  carrion  fleshy  than  to  receive 

8.  Three  thousand  ducats  ;  I'll  not  answer  that ; 
g.  But  say  it  is  my  humor.     Is  it  answered? 

10.  What  if  my  house  be  troubled  with  a  rat 

11.  And  I  be  pleased  to  give  ten  thousand  ducats 

12.  'Yo\i2Js[^\\.  baned?     What — B,re  yon  answered  yet  ? 

13.  Some  men  there  are  love  not  Si  gaping  pig  ; 


Io8  THE  ESSENTIALS 

14.  Some  that  are  mad  if  they  behold  a  cat^ 

15.  Now  for  your  aiiszuer, 

16.  As  there  is  no  firm  reason  to  be  rendered 

17.  Why  he  cannot  abide  2l  gaping  pig, 

18.  Why  he  a  harmless^  necessary  cat. 

19.  So  can  /give  no  reason^  nor  W//  I  not, 

20.  More  than  a  lodged  hate^  and  a  certain  loathing 

21.  I  ^mr  Antonio  that  I  follow  ^/^wj- 

22.  A  losing  suit  against  him.     Are  you  answered? 

To  my  thinking,  ^^z/^  in  the  third 
line  should  be  touched  quite  lightly.  I 
can  imagine  a  reader  going  over  the 
line — as  many  would — with  an  ele- 
phantine tread,  making  much  of  have ; 
but  such  readers  are  not  the  sort  of 
readers  that  take  Nature  as  their  mod- 
el. They  are  of  the  sort  of  readers 
that — unwittingly,  perhaps — seek  to  get 
their  effects  out  of  the  sound  of  their 
voices  rather  than  out  of  the  thoughts 
of  their  author.  Such  reading  is  utter- 
ly wanting  in  movement,  snap,  action, 
earnestness;  in  short,  it  utterly  lacks 
the  natural.  It  is  an  easy  sort  of  read- 
ing ;  easy  because   it  does  not  tax  the 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


109 


intelligence.  Many  persons  of  high 
intelligence  read  in  this  manner  from 
habit.  It  has  never  occurred  to  them 
that  there  is  any  other  way  to  read ; 
that  if  the  thoughts  were  theirs,  and 
the  language  came  to  them  as  they 
give  it  utterance  they  would  speak  it  in 
an  entirely  different  manner.  If  such 
readers  chance  upon  any  one  whose 
utterance  is  true  to  Nature — particular- 
ly if  they  hear  something  read  that  they 
themselves  read — the  effect  on  them, 
not  infrequently,  is  startling ;  the  ex- 
ceeding difference  in  treatment  is  a 
revelation  to  them. 

True,  danger  in  the  fourth  line,  city's 
in  the  fifth,  ask  in  the  sixth,  and  weight 
in  the  seventh  properly  get  a  little 
stress,  but  they,  properly,  get  so  little 
stress  compared  with  the  more  emphat- 
ic words  that,  in  my  judgment,  it  is 
misleading  to  mark  them.  I  don't  see 
how  a  reader  could  fail  to  give  them 


1 1  o  THE  ESSENTIALS 

all  the  prominence  they  demand.  The 
other  words  italicized  should  bespoken 
with  all  the  unction  the  reader  is  mas- 
ter of. 

Not,  that  and  say  in  the  eighth  and 
ninth  lines  are  absolutely  unemphatic. 
Read  as  marked,  how  ponderous  the 
second  clause  of  the  eighth  line  is  !  A 
great  effect  may  be  produced  with  hu- 
mor, but  not  if  the  reader  tarries  on 
the  word  say. 

In  the  tenth,  eleventh,  and  twelfth 
lines,  there  are  only  five  emphatic 
words — raty  ten,  baned,  what,  and  yet. 
All  the  other  words  should  be  spoken 
rapidly.  After  rat,  and  before  and 
after  ten,  the  reader  should  pause  quite 
as  long  as  he  would  after  what  in  the 
twelfth  line. 

The  learned  Canon's  marking  of  the 
thirteenth  line  is  peculiar.  According 
to  his  reading,  there  are  men  that, 
though  they  love  not  gaping  pigs,  they 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 1 1 

do  love  pigs  that  do  not  gap.  Neither 
love  nor  not  is  emphatic,  while  pig  is 
slightly  the  most  emphatic  word  in  the 
line. 

While  I  should  not  emphasize  ren- 
dered in  the  sixteenth  line,  I  should 
emphasize  reason  very  strongly.  The 
defense  of  the  emphasis  on  no  firm  is 
easily  seen,  but  to  my  thinking,  it  is 
hardly  worth  considering.  Indeed, 
these  two  words  are  but  slightly  em- 
phatic. 

In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
lines,  I  should  emphasize  pig  and  cat 
very  strongly,  and  should  not  empha- 
size abide. 

In  the  nineteenth  line,  I  should  em- 
phasize neither  so  nor  no. 

I  always  make  two  syllables  of  lodged, 
as  to  my  ear  it  betters  the  rhythm.  It 
is  always  printed,  I  believe,  as  one  syl- 
lable. The  fact  that  if  two  syllables 
be  made  of  the  word  the  line  has  a  syl- 


1 1 2  THE  ESSENTIALS 

lable  too  many,  does  not  disturb  me. 
Rhythm,  smoothness,  is  the  thing  that 
is  important. 

To  my  seeing,  there  is  not  one  em- 
phatic word  in  the  twenty-first  line, 
and  only  two  in  the  twenty-second — 
losing  and  answered. 

If  these  discussions  2X^  studied,  they 
will  not  fail,  I  think,  to  interest  and 
benefit  many ;  but,  if  they  are  only 
read,  they  will,  I  fear,  neither  interest 
nor  benefit  anyone. 


VI. 


**  The  student  of  the  art  of  delivery  never  finishes, 
there  is  always  something  left  for  him  to  learn." 

Canon  Fleming  proceeds  to  mark  the 
emphatic  words  in  the  fourth  act  of 
*'  The  Merchant  of  Venice  "  as  follows  : 

Bassanio. — This   is  no  answer ^  thou  unfeeling  man, 
to  excuse  the  current  of  thy  cruelty, 

I  should   not   emphasize  no,  but   I 


OF  ELOCUTION.  113 

should  emphasize  man  quite  as  strongly 
as  the  adjective  unfeeling.  The  two 
words  are  equivalent  to  one  single 
word — wretch  or  monster,  for  example 
— and  consequently  should  be  made 
about  equally  emphatic.  In  such 
cases,  the  last  word  always  gets 
slightly  the  most  stress.  If  the  locu- 
tion be  such  that  the  words  may  be 
transposed  without  affecting  the  sense, 
it  will  be  found  that  the  word  placed 
last  will  always  be  slightly  the  most  em- 
phatic. Here  is  an  example:  **  It 
seems  that  a  law  had  been  recently 
made  that  a  tax  on  old  bachelors'  pates 
should  be  laid.'*  Now,  transpose  the 
three  italicized  words  as  we  will — the 
pates  of  old  bachelors,  the  pates  of 
bachelors  that  are  old — and  we  see 
that  it  is  always  the  last  word  that  is 
naturally  somewhat  the  most  emphatic. 

Shylock. — I  am  not  bound  to  please  thee  with  my 
answer. 


114 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


Our  author  marks  no  word  in  this 
speech  for  emphasis.  I  have  always 
emphasized  thee  very  strongly,  and 
this,  possibly,  will  be  considered  by 
most  persons  the  more  effective  read- 
ing; but  is  it  the  more  correct  ?  That, 
I  am  inclined  to  think,  is  more  than 
doubtful.  Should  I  ever  play  the 
scene  again,  I  think  I  shall  adopt  the 
Canon's  reading,  speaking  the  speech 
in  a  sneering  rather  than  in  an  angry 
tone.  Treated  in  this  manner,  I 
should  not  be  surprised  to  see  the 
speech  gain  in  effectiveness. 

Bassanio. — Do  all  men   kill  the   things  they  do  not 
love  ? 

Were  there  any  question  of  the 
things  men  do  love,  then  the  emphasis 
on  7iot  would  be  correct,  but  not  other- 
wise. 

Shylock. — Hates  any  man  the  thing  he  would  not 
kill? 

Neither  not  nor  kill  should  I  empha- 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 1 5 

size,  but  I  should  emphasize  would 
very  strongly.  The  thought  is  :  Does 
any  man  hate  a  thing  he  would  not 
like  to  kill,  and  this  thought  is  very 
clearly  brought  out  by  emphasizing 
would.  The  two  last  words  should  be 
touched  very  lightly. 

Bassanio. — Every  offence  is  not  a  hate  2X  first. 
Shylock. —  What!    would'st   thou   have    a  serpent 
sting  thee  twice  ? 

This  reading  is  bettered,  I  think,  by 
touching  sting  lightly. 

Antonio. — I  pray  you,  think,  you  question  with  a 
Jew. 

The  comma  after  think  is  the  Can- 
on's. This  reading  seems  to  me  utter- 
ly bad;  it  has,  so  far  as  I  can  see, 
neither  rhyme  nor  reason  to  defend  it. 
Jew  is  surely  the  word  to  emphasize. 

You  may  as  well  go  stand  upon  the  beach 
And  bid  the  main  flood  bate  his  usual  height; 

It  is  not  probable  that  our  author 
would  have  us  make  as  much  of  stand 
as  the  italicizing  would  intimate. 


1 1 6  THE  ESSENTIALS 

You  may  as  well  use  question  with  the  wolf^ 
Why  he  hath  made  the  ewe  bleat  for  the  lamb, 

I  should  not  stop  for  an  instant  on 
question,  and  in  the  second  line  the 
only  words  I  should  emphasize  are  ewe 
and  lamb. 

You  may  as  well  y^^^^V  the  mountain  pines 
To  wag  their  high  tops  and  to  make  no  noise. 

Were  I  to  mark  these  two  lines  for 
emphasis,  I  should  probably  italicize 
mountain  pines  and  leave  the  rest  to 
the  reader's  discretion. 

You  may  as  well  do  anything  most  hard 

As  seek  to  soften  that  (than  which  what's  harder?) 

His  ye  wish  heart;  therefore  I  do  beseech  you 

Make  no  more  offers^  use  no  further  m-eans^ 

But,  with  all  brief  Z-nA  plain  conveniency^ 

Let  me  have  judgment  and  the  Jew  his  wilL 

Here,  to  my  thinking,  is  a  great 
deal  too  much  emphasizing.  The 
reading  here  indicated  cannot  be 
other,  it  seems  to  me,  than  heavy, 
stilted,  monotonous — in  a  word,  un- 
natural.    The  words  I  should  not  em- 


OF  ELOCUTION, 


117 


phasize  are  :  do,  most,  what's  tkereforCy 
no  more,  no  further  and  alL 

Bassanio — For  thy  three  thousand  ducats  here  are 
six, 

Shylock. — If  evWy  ducat  in  six  thousand  ducats 
Were  in  six  parts,  and  every  part  a  ducat ^ 
I  would  not  draw  them;  I  would  have  my  bond. 

If  Shylock  were  asked  if  he  would 
accept,  then  he  would  properly,  natu- 
rally, emphasize  the  negative,  but  not 
otherwise.  Draw^  I  take  it,  is  the  em- 
phatic word. 

VII. 

**  The  most  offensive  thing  we  encounter  on  the  stage 
is  a  big  voice  with  little  intelligence  behind  it." 

Our  English  reader  continues  his 
marking  of  the  emphatic  words  in  the 
fourth  act  of  '*The  Merchant  of  Ven- 
ice **  thus: 

Duke. — How  shalt  thou  hope  for  mercy  ^  rend  ring 
none  ?" 

If  the  thought  is  :  How  can  you  ex- 
pect any  mercy,  since  you  render  no 


1 1 8  THE  ESSENTIALS 

mercy  ?  then  thou  and  rencPring  are 
properly  the  emphatic  words  of  the 
line. 

Shylock. — What  judgment  shall  I  dread,  doing  no 
wrong  ? 
You   have  among  you  many  a  purchased  slave. 
Which,  like  your  asses  and  your  dogs  and  mules ^ 
You  tise  innbject  and  in  slavish  parts, 
Because  you  bought  them. 

Neither  you  nor  use  should  I  em- 
phasize ;  hvX  parts  I  should  emphasize 
quite  as  strongly  as  any  other  word  in 
the  sentence. 

Shall  /say  X.o you. 
Let  them  h^  free,  marry  them  to  your  heirs. 
Why  sweat  they  under  burdens  ? 

This  reading  of  the  first  clause  seems 
to  me  to  be  **  clean  out  of  the  way.*' 
Never  have  I  erred  more,  or  say  is  the 
word,  and  the  only  word,  to  emphasize. 
The  Canon's  reading  I  have  often 
heard,  and  it  may  be  the  traditional 
reading,  but  tradition  never  yet  has 
made  anything  right.  There  is  no 
reason,  good  or  bad,  for  emphasizing 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


119 


marry.  The  offensive  lies  not  in  the 
marrying,  but  in  the  thought  of  marry- 
ing the  slaves  to  the  owners'  children. 

Let  their  beds 
Be  made  as  soft  2,s>  yours ^  and  let  X.\i.^\x  palates 
Be  seasoned  v<[\\.\i.  such  viands? 

Neither  made  nor  seasoned  nor  such 
should,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  be  made 
the  least  emphatic.  The  first  their  I 
should  emphasize  as  strongly  as  bedsy 
nor  should  I  treat  the  second  their  as 
an  unemphatic  word.  It  stands  in 
contradistinction  to  your  understood ; 
this  we  clearly  see,  if  we  supply  the 
ellipses. 

You  will  answer t 
The  slaves  are  ours.     So  do  /  answer  ^^«. 

Why  emphasize  you  ?  There  is  no 
suggestion  that  an  answer  shall,  or 
may,  come  from  anyone  else.  Here 
is  a  typical  example  of  a  non-natural, 
non-intelligent  style  of  reading  that  is 
very  prevalent.     The  art  in  it  is  on  a 


I20  THE  ESSENTIALS 

level  with  the  art  in  the  sign  of  the 
way-side  inn.  Neither  the  first  you^ 
slaves,  nor  so  should  be  emphasized. 

1h.G  pound  oi  Jlesh  that  I  demand  oi  him 

Is  dearly  bought ;  'tis  mine^  and  I  will  have  it. 

I  should  not  pause  an  instant  on  de- 
mandy  nor  do  I  emphasize  will,  though 
this  is  the  usual,  and  I  believe  the 
traditional,  reading.  To  me,  this  treat- 
ment smacks  too  strongly  of  the  bark- 
ing-dog style.  Veritable  resolve  does 
not  waste  its  strength  in  loud  talk. . 

If  you  deny  me,  fie  upon  your  law  ! 

There  is  no  force  in  the  decrees  of  Venice, 

I  stand  for  judgment :  answer^  shall  I  have  it  ? 

In  these  three  lines  the  learned 
Canon  and  I  would  have  been  of  one 
mind  had  he  not  italicized  no  and  de- 
crees. 

Duke. — Upon  my  power  I  may  dismiss  this  court. 
Unless  Bellario,  a  learne'd  doctor. 
Whom  I  have  sent  for  to  determine  this 
Come  here  to-day. 

To   my   thinking,  the   reading  here 


OF  ELOCUTION,  121 

indicated  is  about  as  wide  of  what  it 
should  be  as  it  well  could  be.  There 
is  no  question  of  anybody's  else  power, 
hence  why  emphasize  my  ?  If  there  is 
anything  to  emphasize  in  the  second 
line  it  surely  is  not  unless  and  learned; 
it  is  rather  Bellario  and  doctor.  I 
should  not  emphasize  sent.  Its  posi- 
tion in  the  line  brings  to  it  a  little 
more  breath  than  the  other  words  get, 
determine  excepted,  but  it  cannot  be 
said  to  be  emphatic. 

Salarino. — My  lord^  here  stays  without 
A  messenger  with  letters  from  the  Doctor, 
New  come  from  Padua, 

The  most  emphatic,  or  rather  the 
only  emphatic,  word  in  the  first  line  is 
without.  This,  I  think,  clearly  appears 
if  we  transpose  the  words  thus  : 

Without,  my  Lord,  there  stays  a  messenger. 
Duke. — Bring  us  the  letters  ;  call  the  messenger. 

This  is  the  treatment,  I  fancy,  that 
this  line  has  commonly  received  from 


122  THE  ESSENTIALS 

time  immemorial  ;  yet  I  like  better  the 
reading  that  makes  well-nigh  as  much 
of  letters  and  messenger  as  of  bring  and 
call. 

BassANIO. — Good  cheer y  Antonio  !  What  man,  courage 
yet ! 
The  Jew  shall  have  tny  fleshy  bloody  bones  and  c//, 
Ere  thou  shalt  lose  for  me  one  drop  of  blood. 

All  readers,  I  think,  emphasize  what. 
It's  not  being  italicized  here  is  prob- 
ably due  to  an  oversight.  Neither /^^j"^ 
nor  one  should  I  emphasize. 

Antonio. — /am  a  tainted  v7&th.Qr  of  ihejlock 
Meetest  for  death  ;  the  weakest  kind  of  fruit 
Drops  earliest  to  the  ground  ;  and  so  let  me. 
You  cannot  better  be  employed,  Bassanio, 
Than  to  live  still,  and  write  mine  epitaph, 

Antonio  has  no  thought  here  of  in- 
stituting a  comparison  between  him- 
self and  anyone  else.  There  is  no 
such  thought,  for  example,  as  I  am  the 
sickly  wether  of  the  flock ;  you  are 
the  healthy  wether  of  the  flock,  hence 
he  would  not  emphasize  the  qualifying 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


123 


word.  In  the  first  three  lines  of  this 
speech,  I  should  either  not  mark  any 
word  for  emphasis,  or  I  should  mark, 
in  addition  to  the  words  our  author 
marks,  the  words  wether^  fruity  and 
ground.  In  neither  case  should  I  mark 
the  first  word,  which,  together  with 
am,  should  be  tripped  over  lightly.  Epi- 
taph  rather  than  write  is  the  emphatic 
word.  The  line  means,  live  on  and 
epitaph  me.  If  Antonio  knew  that 
Bassanio  had  already  composed  his 
epitaph,  he  would  probably  emphasize 
write^  not  otherwise. 


124  THE  ESSENTIALS 


VIII. 

One's  emphasis  is  the  gauge  of  one's  ability  to  un- 
derstand. Nothing  else  betrays  our  ignorance  of 
the  text  like  misplaced  emphasis.  One  who  empha- 
sizes correctly  is  more  than  likely  to  do  justice  to 
his  author  in  other  regards.  The  acumen  that 
guides  to  a  discreet  and  illuminative  emphasis  is 
more  than  likely  to  lead  to  a  proper  emotional  ren- 
dering.— S.  H,  Clark, 

Canon  Fleming  goes  from  where  we 
left  him  directly  to  Portia's  entrance. 
He  takes  an  occasional  liberty  with 
the  text  that  I  fail  to  see  any  reason 
for.  I  follow  him,  however,  as  he  pro- 
ceeds, thus : 

Duke. — Give  me  your  hand.  You  come  from 
learned  Bellario  ? 

Portia. — I  do^  my  Lord. 
Duke. — You  are  welcome;  take  your  place. 
Are  you  acquainted  with  the  cause  in  question? 

Marked  or  unmarked,  no  one  could 
fail  to  read  the  first  speech  correctly ; 
but  why  change  old  to  learned,  and 
why  mark  the  adjective  for  emphasis? 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


i?5 


If  *' cause  in  question" — which  it  will 
be  observed  is  not  Shakespeare — 
means  cause  of  this  action,  litigation  or 
suit,  then  it  would  seem  that  causCy  and 
not  question,  is  the  emphatic  word. 

Portia. — I  am  informed  throughly  of  the  cause; 
Which  is  the  merchant  here,  and  which  the  Jew? 

Of  these  seven  italicized  words,  I 
should  emphasize  only  three — through- 
ly, merchant,  and  Jew. 

Duke. — Antonio  and  old  Shylock^  both  sld^n^.  forth, 

Portia. — Is  your  name  Shy  lock? 

Shylock. — Shylock  is  my  name. 

Portia. —  You  stand  within  his  danger  ^  do  you  not? 

Emphasize  within  or  the  second 
you  !  f     I  fail  to  see  why. 

Antonio. — Ay,  so  he  says, 
Portia. — Do  you  confess  the  bond  ? 
Antonio. — I  do. 

So  is  unemphatic,  as  we  see  if  we 
transpose  the  words,  thus  :  He  says  so. 

Portia. — Then  must  the  Jew  be  merciful. 

The   context   might   make  this  the 


126  THE  ESSENTIALS 

proper  reading ;  but  it  doesn't.  As 
the  Jew  has  not  already  been  impor- 
tuned, so  far  as  Portia  knows,  the 
proper  reading  emphasizes  Jew  and 
merciful.  The  thought  Portia  would 
express  is  simply  this  :  Since  you  ac- 
knowledge the  bond,  there  is  nothing 
left  for  you  but  to  throw  yourself  on 
the  mercy  of  the  Jew. 

Shylock. — On  what   compulsion  must   I  ?     Tell  me 
that. 

I  would  not  quarrel  with  this  mark- 
ing, though  I  should  have  left  tell  un- 
italicized.  The  emphasis  on  mtist  is 
not  necessary  to  bring  out  the  sense, 
but,  by  emphasizing  it,  Shylock  may,  if 
he  treats  it  properly,  very  forcibly  give 
utterance  to  the  feeling  aroused  with- 
in him  by  the  suggestion  that  he  shall 
be  merciful.  Such  cases  as  this  are 
rarely  met  with.  The  naked  thought 
nearly  always  determines. 

Portia. — The  quality  of  mercy  is  not  strained. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 2  7 

I  say  and,  a  la  Meddle,  I  say  it  bold- 
ly :  Nobody  reads  this  line  correctly. 
There  is  but  one  emphatic  word  in  it 
— strained.  All  the  other  words 
should  be  tripped  over  quite  lightly; 
yet,  all  the  many  Portias  I  have  heard 
— save  one  of  my  own  coaching — 
made  at  the  least  two,  and  usually 
three,  words  in  the  line  emphatic.  To 
make  any  word  in  the  line  emphatic 
but  strained  is  to  suggest  a  meaning 
not  intended.  The  first  three  words 
add  nothing  to  the  sense,  nothing. 
They  are  there  simply  as  padding, 
to  fill  out  the  line,  or  as  rhetorical 
embellishment,  yet  the  majority  of 
readers — good,  easy  souls!  make 
quality  quite  as  emphatic  as  any  other 
word  in  the  line,  and  often  more 
emphatic  than  the  word  that  alone 
should  be  emphasized.  Strange  that 
so  few  readers  deem  it  all  necessary  to 
think!     There  is  more  in  the  art  of 


1 2  8  THE  ESSENTIALS 

reading  than  the  mere  firing  of  sound 
at  words,  few  as  there  are  that  seem  to 
think  so. 

If  it  were  anywhere  said  that  mercy 
is  strained,  we  should  properly  empha- 
size not,  and  should  not  emphasize 
strained. 

It  droppeth  as  the  gentle  rain  from  heaven 
Upon  the  place  beneath.     It  is  iiiuice  blest ; 
It  hlesseth  him  X\i2X  gives  and  him  that  takes 
*  Tis  mightiest  in  the  viightiest.     It  becomes 
The  throndd  monarch  better  than  his  crown. 

Not  place,  but  beneath,  is  the  em- 
phatic word.  Take  what  word  we  please 
instead  of  beneath — above,  chosen,  de- 
signated— and  we  find  that  it  is  the 
limiting,  defining  word  that  properly 
gets  the  stress.  It  is  only  the  heavy, 
monotonous,  elephantine  style  of  de- 
livery, which  our  author  would  seem 
to  sympathize  with,  that  would  dwell 
on  blesseth.  In  the  sixth  line,  better  is 
the  least  and  crow7i  the  most  emphatic 
word.      This    line   usually   gives    the 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


129 


learner  more  trouble  than  any  other 
line  in  the  whole  speech.  There  are 
thoughtful  readers  who  contend  that 
better  is  the  only  emphatic  word  in  the 
line,  but  their  reasons  have  always 
seemed  to  me  quite  valueless. 

1.  His  sceptre  shows  the  force  of  temporal  power, 

2.  The  attribute  to  awe  send  majesty 

3.  Wherein  doth  sit  the  dread  Sind  fear  of  kings 

4.  But  mercy  is  above  this  sceptred  sway, 

5.  It  is  efithrone'd  in  the  hearts  of  kings  ; 

6.  It  is  an  attribute  to  God  himself: 

7.  And  earthly  power  doth  then  show  likest  God's, 

8.  When  7nercy  seasons  justice. 

In  the  first  of  these  eight  lines, 
/orce  is  not  at  all  emphatic,  nor  is  at- 
tribute in  the  second.  In  the  third 
line,  ^m^s  is  properly  slightly  more 
emphatic  than  either  dread  or  fear. 
The  thought  is  made  clearer  to  many 
by  changing  the  to  our.  In  the  fourth 
line,  not  sway,  but  sceptred,  is  the 
word  to  emphasize.  A  little  study  en- 
ables us  to  see  that  the  sceptre's  sway 
is  contrasted  with  mercy's  sway,  force 


1 30  THE  ESSEN  TIALS 

or  power;  it  matters  not  which  word 
we  use.  Enthrondd,  in  the  fifth  line, 
should  be  touched  very  lightly.  Its 
long,  sonorous  0  is  very  beguiling,  but 
it  is  only  the  unthinking  bowwower, 
who  reads  for  sound,  not  sense,  that 
would  dwell  on  it.  It,  whose  anteced- 
ent is  mercy,  is  properly  as  emphatic 
as  hearts.  This  somewhat  more  clear- 
ly appears  if  we  change  it  to  that, 
which,  though  it  be  Shakespeare,  I  do 
not  hesitate  to  intimate  would  better 
the  diction.  The  change  would  give 
the  reader  a  much  better  vowel  sound 
to  deal  with.  In  the  seventh  line,  we 
should  trip  lightly  over  them,  and 
should  emphasize  Gods  fully  as 
strongly  as  earthly.  This  is  made 
clear  by  supplying  the  ellipsis,  power, 
after  God's.  The  sentiment,  rather 
than  the  sense,  makes  seasons  about  as 
emphatic  as  the  words  immediately  be- 
fore and  after  it. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  131 

Therefore,  Jew, 
'Y\iOVi%h.  justice  be  thy  plea  ^  consider  this 
That  in  the  course  oi  justice  none  of  us 
Should  see  salvation. 

Neither  justice^  plea^  nor  consider 
are  at  all  emphatic.  The  emphatic 
words  are  be  and  this. 

We  do  pray  for  mercy ^ 
And  that  same  prayer  doth  teach  us  all  to  render 
The  ^(f^^j  of  mercy. 

Neither  teach  nor  render  should  be 
emphasized.  Ally  on  the  contrary, 
should  be  made  very  emphatic. 

I  have  spoke  thus  much 
To  mitigate  ih^  justice  of  ihy  plea^ 
Which,  if  ihoM/ollotUy  this  strict  court  of  Venice 
Must  needs  give  sentence  'gainst  the  merchant  there. 

In  order  to  make  the  words  spoke 
thus  much  say  what  they  are  intended 
to  say  they  must  all  be  spoken  with 
equal  stress.  Spoken  as  our  author 
marks  them  they  suggest  the  thought 
that  something  else  will  be  spoken  for 
some  other  purpose.     Not  infrequent- 


132 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


ly  we  hear  a  Portia  emphasize  spoke 
and  trip  over  the  other  two  words,  in- 
timating that  she  is  going  to  sing,  or 
chant,  or  write  something  else  for 
some  other  purpose.  The  one  read- 
ing is  as  bad  as  the  other.  Plea  is  un- 
emphatic.  The  comma  after  which  is 
mine.  I  do  not  find  it  in  any  one  of 
the  three  editions  within  my  present 
reach.  The  clause  being  parenthetic, 
the  comma  seems  to  me  to  be  neces- 
sary. Stricty  court  and  Venice  are 
equally  emphatic.  To  emphasize 
strict  only  is  to  say  that  there  is  at  the 
least  one  other  court  that  is  not  strict. 
At  the  best,  strict  is  little  else  than 
padding.  The  line  is  just  as  forcible 
without  it ;  it  serves  chiefly  to  fill  out 
the  line.  So  far  as  sense  and  force 
are  concerned,  one  word,  court,  would 
suffice.  In  reading  the  last  line  the 
question  of  climax  should  be  consid- 
ered.    Read  for  the  thought  only,  the 


OF  ELOCUTION, 


133 


speech  ends  tamely.  The  necessary 
elevation  is  attained  by  dwelling  on 
needs  and  Against  and  making  a  slight 
pause  before  and  after  'gainst. 

This  speech  is  read  in  every  con- 
cievable  manner.  The  Portias  that  I 
have  seen,  almost  without  an  excep- 
tion, have  gone  at  it  in  a  pell-mell, 
haphazard,  slapdash  way  that  showed 
that  they  depended  on  their  voice- 
making  apparatus  rather  than  on  the 
thought,  on  vociferation  rather  than 
on  Shakespeare,  for  any  effect  they 
might  produce.  They  were  rewarded 
with  the  plaudits  of  the  many;  the 
censure  of  the  few  did  not  concern 
them,  and — they  were  happy. 


134  ^-^-^  ESSENTIALS 


IX. 

**  He  that  reads  really  well  utters  the  words  with 
the  care  that  the  musician  exercises  in  playing  or 
singing." 

I  occasionally  meet  a  person  who 
seems  to  think  that  the  exercise  of  the 
intelligence  in  reading  is  fatal  to  what 
an  actor  I  met,  a  day  or  two  ago,  called 
spontaneity,  by  which  I  understood 
him  to  mean  naturalness.  He  seemed 
to  incline  strongly  to  the  opinion  that 
emphasis,  pause,  and  inflection  are 
matters  of  little  importance,  and  that  a 
reader  is  likely  to  be  stilted  and  non- 
natural  in  proportion  to  the  extent  he 
allows  himself  to  consider  the  question 
of  technique.  All  that  is  necessary, 
according  to  these  people,  if  I  under- 
stand them,  is  to  know  the  words  and 
to  speak  them  with  earnestness.  If 
they  are  right,  then  reading  is  only  a 
matter    of   memory   and   unction;    in 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


135 


other  words,  of  memory  and  unguided 
fuss  and  fury.  To  these  people,  who 
are  commonly  actors  (self-declared),  I 
would  say,  with  as  much  respect  as  I 
can  muster  for  the  occasion,  that  if 
they  would  but  give  half  as  much  time 
to  the  learning-  of  their  business,  as  the 
average  chorus-singer  or  clog-dancer 
gives  to  learning  his,  they  might  possi- 
bly modify  their  opinion  with  regard  to 
the  value  of  study.  There  are  many 
of  us  that  are  never  more  glib,  never 
more  confident,  never  more  dogmatic 
than  when  we  talk  about  something 
we  know  nothing  about. 

But  let  us  return  to  Canon  Fleming 
and  '*  The  Merchant  of  Venice'*  : 

Shylock.— J/y  deeds  upon  my  head!     I  crave  [the 
law] 

The  penalty  and  forfeit  of  my  bond. 

We  all  agree,  I  think,  with  regard 
to  the  meaning  of  the  first  sentence, 
which  is  this  :   For  my  deeds  I  will  be 


s^=YB  R  A  R  y^ 
^  OF  THE 


UNIVERSITY 


OF 


CaL!FO^>^^^ 


136  THE  ESSENTIALS 

answerable.  Does  our  author's  em- 
phasis make  the  words  express  this 
thought?  I  think  not.  His  emphasis, 
to  my  seeing,  makes  the  words  say: 
My  deeds  upon  my  head,  and  not  on 
any  other  part  of  my  body.  To  make 
the  words  say  what  they  are  intended 
to  say,  it  is  necessary,  I  am  confident, 
to  emphasize  the  second  m^y  as  strong- 
ly as  the  first,  and  this,  if  I  do  not  err, 
is  the  way  the  sentence  is  usually  read. 
Whether  the  learned  Canon  gives  us 
the  full  line  or  not,  crave  is  not  em- 
phatic; it  is  the  thing  craved,  the  law, 
that  we  should  emphasize.  The  next 
line,  with  its  emphatic  words,  stands  in 
elocutionary  apposition  to  law. 

Portia. — Is  he  not  able  to  discharge  the  money  ? 

Bassanio. — Yes,  here    I   tender  it   for   him  in  the 
court! 
Yea,  twice  the  sum:  if  that  will  not  suffice^ 
I  will  be  bound  to  pay  it  ten  times  o'er, 
On  forfeit  of  my  hands,  my  head,  my  feet  [heart]. 
If  this^\W  not  suffice,  it  must  appear 
That  malice  bears  down  truth. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  137 

I  fail  to  see  any  defense  for  the 
emphasis  on  tender  in  the  first  line, 
not  in  the  second,  noty  suffice  or  appear 
in  the  fifth,  or  for  bear  or  down  in  the 
sixth.  On  the  other  hand,  I  should 
emphasize  sum  in  the  second  line  quite 
as  strongly  as  twice.  If  Bassanio  said, 
for  example,  I  not  only  tender  him  the 
sum  we  owe  him,  but  twice  the  sum, 
our  author's  emphasis  would  be  cor- 
rect, not  otherwise.  In  the  third  line 
I  should  emphasize  the  last  three 
words.  They^^^  of  the  fourth  line  is 
a  new  reading  to  me.  Possibly  it  is  a 
misprint. 

And  I  beseech  you 
Wrest  once  the  law  to  your  authority y 
To  do  a  great  right  do  a  little  wrongs 
And  curb  this  cruel  devil  of  his  will. 

The  emphasizing  of  wrest  and  once 
smacks  of  the  kind  of  elocution  that 
tries  to  get  an  effect  out  of  every  word. 
It  reminds  one  of  those  speakers  that 
make  up  in  sound  for  what  they  lack 


138  THE  ESSENTIALS 

in  sense.  Read  in  this  way,  the  line 
loses  much  of  its  proper  effect.  All 
the  words  but  two  should  come  *'  trip- 
pingly from  the  tongue."  Why  em- 
phasize this  in  the  last  line?  There  is 
no  question  of  any  other  devil. 

Portia. — It   viust  not  be.     There   is   no  power  in 
Venice 
Can  alter  a  decree  established 
'Twill  be  recorded  for  2.  precedent, 
And  many  an  error,  by  the  same  example^ 
Will  rush  into  the  state.     It  can  not  be. 

The  most  emphatic  word  in  the  first 
sentence  is  the  last.  If  it  had  been 
said  that  it  must  be,  then  not  should 
be  the  only  emphatic  word.  If  it  had 
been  said  that  it  cannot  be,  then  must 
would  be  the  only  emphatic  word.  As 
it  is,  three  words  are  emphasized  about 
equally  in  order  to  give  the  delivery 
the  elevation  that  the  situation  and 
sentiment  demand.  For  the  same 
reason,  many  and  error  in  the  fourth 
line   should   be  emphasized.     Neither 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


139 


nOi  power,  alter  nor  decree  should  be 
emphasized;  Venicey  on  the  contrary, 
should  be  emphasized  quite  as  strong- 
ly as  any  other  word  in  the  speech. 

Shylock. — A  Daniel  come  to  judgment  !     Yea^  a 

Daniel! 
O  wise  young  judge  !  How  do  I  honor  thee. 

Of  these  nine  italicized  words,  I 
should  emphasize  only  five — Daniely 
yea,  Daniel,  wise  and  honor. 

Portia. — I  pray  you,  let  me  look  Vi'^ovi  the  bond, 

I  should  emphasize  pray  quite  as 
strongly  as  look,  and  should  not  em- 
phasize bond. 

Shylock. — Here  'tis  most  reverend  doctor ^  here  it  is, 

Shylock's  eagerness  is  ill  indicated 
by  all  this  italicizing ;  and  then,  read 
according  to  the  marking,  Shylock 
cannot  get  the  effect  out  of  the  word 
reverend  that  is  within  his  easy  reach 
if  he  emphasizes  this  word  only. 

Portia. — Shylock!  There's  thrice  thy  money  offered 
thee. 


I40 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


One  word  only,  thrice,  is  all  that, 
in  my  judgment,  should  be  made  at  all 
emphatic  in  this  line.  The  exclamation 
point  is  our  author's.  I  doubt  wheth- 
er it  will  be  found  elsewhere.  A  com- 
ma is  the  usual  punctuation. 

Shylock. — An   oath,  an   oath !  I  have    an   oath   in 
heave7i : 
Shall  I  \2iy  perjury  upon  my  soul? 
NOf  not  for  Venice, 

The  effect  is  weakened,  rather  than 
heightened,  by  making  the  third  oath 
emphatic.  I  should  italicize  not  rather 
than  no  of  the  last  line.  Both  words 
should  be  spoken  with  a  good  deal  of 
force. 

Portia. — Why,  this  bond  is  forfeit, 

And  lawfully y  by  this  the  Jew  may  claim 
A  poutid  oi  flesh  be  by  him  cut  off 
Nearest  the  merchant's  heart.     Be  merciful. 
Take  thrice  thy  fnoney.     Bid  me  tear  the  bond. 

In  these  five  lines,  our  Author 
would  emphasize  sixteen  words ;  I 
should  emphasize   only  Xixn^— forfeit, 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


141 


lawfully,  pound,  fiesh,  nearest,  heart, 
merciful,  take,  and  tear.  *'  Take  thrice 
thy  money,  means,  simply,  Accept  their 
offer.  Why  emphasize  bond  since  there 
is  no  question  of  tearing  anything 
else  ? 

Shylock. — When  it  is /<2/^  according  to  the  tenor. 
It  doth  appear  you  are  a  worthy  judge; 
You  know  the  law,  your  exposition 
Hath  been  most  sound,     I  charge  you  by  the  law. 
Whereof  you  are  a  well  deserving  pillar^ 
Proceed  to  judgment.     By  my  soul  I  swear 
There  is  no  power  in  the  tongue  of  man 
To  alter  me.     I  stay  here  on  my  bond. 

In  the  first  line  of  this  speech,  a 
Shylock  should  not  only  make  clear  the 
fact  that  the  bond  must  be  *'  paid  accord- 
ing to  the  tenor,*'  but  in  order  to  get 
all  the  effect  out  of  the  line  there  is  in 
it,  he  must  also  emphasize  the  fact 
that  nothing  but  a  pound  of  Antonio's 
flesh  will  be  accepted.  This  he  does 
best  by  a  peculiar,  indescribable  hand- 
ling of  the  word  according  which  re- 
sults in  making  it  the  most  emphatic 


142 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


word  in  the  line.  In  the  third  line,  I 
should  emphasize  law  as  strongly  as 
know.  If  it  were  a  question  as  to 
whether  Portia  does  or  does  not  know 
the  law,  the  case  would  be  very  differ- 
ent. If  the  thought  were,  for  example, 
you  know  the  law  but  you  are  not  will- 
ing to  h^  guided  by  it.  In  the  fourth 
line  I  should  again  emphasize  law. 
Our  author's  reading  of  the  seventh 
line  does  not  express  the  thought  the 
line  is  intended  to  convey,  which  is, 
simply,  there  is  no  power  in  man  to 
alter  me;  the  other  words  serve  for 
little  else  than  for  poetical  embellish- 
ment. The  effect  of  the  last  sentence 
is  heightened  by  dwelling  on  on  as 
much  as  on  the  two  preceding  words. 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


X. 


143 


I  hold  every  man  a  debtor  to  his  profession  from 
the  which,  as  men  do  of  course  seek  to  receive  coun- 
tenance and  profit,  so  ought  they  of  duty  to  endeavor 
themselves,  byway  of  amends,  to  be  a  help  and  orna- 
ment thereto.— Bacon. 

Canon  Fleming  continues  to  intimate 
how  he  would  have  the  Trial  Scene  in 
'*  The  Merchant  of  Venice ''  read  in 
this  wise : 

Antonio. — Most  heartily  I  do  beseech  the  court 

To  give  ihQ  judgment, 
Portia. — Why  then  thus  it  is  ; 

You  must  prepare  your  dosom  for  his  knife, 
Shylock. — O  noble  judge  !     O  excellent  young  man  ! 

To  my  thinking,  our  author's  reading 
of  these  three  speeches  is  much  bet- 
tered by  spending  no  more  breath  on 
the  words  beseech^  courty  and  prepare 
than  is  necessary  to  articulate  them 
distinctly.  I  certainly  should  not  em- 
phasize them. 


144 


THE  ESSENTIALS 


Portia. — For  the  intent  3,n6.  purpose  of  the  law 
Hath /2/// relation  to  X.h.&  penalty, 
Which  here  appeareth  due  upon  the  bond. 

It  would  seem  to  me  that  law  is 
scarcely,  if  at  all,  less  emphatic  than 
either  intent  or  purpose.  What  Shy- 
lock  has  just  said  about  Portia's  know- 
ing the  law  does  not  effect  the  reading 
of  the  line.  Penalty  should  certainly 
not  be  made  more  emphatic  than  here 
and  appeareth^  hence  I  should  italicize 
all  three  or  none.  The  wisdom  of 
marking  bond  for  emphasis  is  ques- 
tionable. No  reader,  I  think,  would 
fail  to  give  it  all  the  prominence  de- 
sirable. 

Shylock. — *Tis  very  true  !     O  wise  and  upright  judge  ! 
How  much  more  elder  art  than  thy  looks, 

I  should  counsel  the  reader  to  make 
quite  as  much  of  true  as  of  very ;  and, 
in  the  second  line,  I  would  intimate 
that  I  would  have  him  make  a  great  deal 
more  of  much  than  of  any  other  word 
in  the  line  by  leaving  all   the   other 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


145 


words  in  Roman.  All  the  words,  to 
my  thinking,  after  this  one  strong  em- 
phasis, should  be  enunciated  quite 
trippingly.  Here,  as  always,  I  aim 
only  at  what  I  think  will  heighten  the 
effect.  Nature  is  a  niggard  and  does 
not  expend  her  energies  where  she 
will  not  be  rewarded. 

Portia. — Therefore  lay  bare  your  bosom. 
Shylock. — Ay,  his  breast. 

So  says  the  bond: — doth  it  not,  noble  judge? 

Nearest  his  heart.      Those  are  the  very  words. 

Neither  doth  nor  judge  ^o\Adi  I  em- 
phasize, but  I  should  emphasize  not. 
The  long  0  of  noble  makes  it  possible 
for  the  exultant  Shylock  to  voice  his 
joy  to  the  full.  No  utterance  con- 
ceivable of  jtidge  would  aid  him  herein 
a  whit.  Why  emphasize  those?  If 
there  be  ^  reason,  I  cannot  see  it. 
The  bare  of  Portia's  line  should  be 
emphasized. 

Portia. — It  is  so.     Are  there  balance  here  to  weigh 
VdQjlesh? 


146  THE  ESSENTIALS 

Shylock. — I  have  them  ready, 

Portia. — Have  by  some  surgeon,  Shylock,  on  your 
charge. 

To  stop  his  wounds,  lest  he  do  bleed  to  death. 

Neither  is.fieshy  stop,  nor  bleed^ovXdi 
I  emphasize ;  and  had  I  marked  your 
for  emphasis,  I  should  also  have  marked 
charge. 

Shylock. — Is  it  so  nominated  \n.  the  bond? 
Portia. — It  is  not  so  expressed ;  but  what  of  that? 

*Twere  good  you  do  so  much  for  charity, 
Shylock. — I  cannot _/f«^  it.     *Tis  not  in  the  bond, 
Portia. — Come,   merchant,  have  you  anything  to 
say? 

I  should  not  italicize  not,  good,  or 
anything.  Say,  it  seems  to  me,  rather 
than  anything,  is  the  word  to  mark,  if 
one  would  mark  something.  Some- 
times the  line  is  read  with  the  emphasis 
on  you — a  reading  easily  defended. 

Antonio. — But  little  ;  I  am  armed  2ir\d  well  prepared. 
Give  me  your  hand,  Bassanio  ;  fare  you 

well ! 
Grieve  not  that  I  sltd.  fallen  to  this  ior  you, 
T ox  h&x&in  Fortune  sho^shQiSQli  more 'kind 
Than  is  her  custom. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  147 

I  see  no  reason  for  making  fallen 
emphatic.  If  the  word  were  come, 
would  anyone  think  of  emphasizing  it? 
HereiUy  to  my  thinking,  is  the  most  em- 
phatic word  in  the  fourth  line,  unless  it 
be  kind,  which  is  very  much  more  em- 
phatic than  more.  If  we  had  as  kind 
anywhere,  then  more  kind  would  be 
correct. 

It  is  still  her  use 
To  let  the  wretched  tn2in  outlive  his  wealthy 
To  view,  with  hollow  eye  and  wrinkled hvovr^ 
An  age  of  poverty  ;  from  which  lingering  penance 
Of  such  a  misery  doth  she  cut  me  off, 

I  should  italicize  neither  use,  outlive, 
hollow,  wrinkled,  lingering,  misery,  cut, 
nor  offy  but  I  should  italicize  eye,  brow, 
poverty,  such,  and  me.  I  should  hope 
and  expect  to  get  a  better  result  than 
our  author  by  marking  the  lines  thus : 

It  is  still  her  use 
To  let  the  wretched  Tn3.n  outlive  his  wealthy 
To  view,  with  hollow  eye,  and  wrinkled  drow. 
An  age  oi poverty  ;  from  which  lingering  penance 
Of  such  a  misery  doth  she  cut  me  off. 


148  THE  ESSENTIALS 

It  is  quite  safe,  I  think,  to  leave  the 
secondary  emphases  to  take  care  of 
themselves.  I  strongly  suspect  that 
our  author  often  employs  rules  in  de- 
termining what  words  should  be  em- 
phasized. If  he  does,  I  incline  to  the 
opinion  that  he  succeeds  no  better 
with  them  than  others  have  succeeded 
with  them.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  the 
average  rule-user  goes  wrong  more  fre- 
quently than  he  goes  right.  The  rule 
of  gumption  is  the  only  rule  that  is 
worth  a  fig  in  determining  what  words 
should  be  emphasized 

Commend  me  to  your  honorable  wife  ; 
TV// her  \.\i&  process  of  Antonio's  end; 
Say  how  I  loved  yoM  :  speak  va^fair  in  death. 
And  when  the  tale  is  told  bid  h-^r  h^  judge 
Whether  Bassanio  had  not  once  a  love, 

I  question  the  wisdom  of  marking 
any  word  in  the  first  two  of  these  five 
lines  for  emphasis,  there  being  no  em- 
phasis that  is  at  all  salient.  If  honor- 
ablcj   however,   is  marked,   then    wife 


OF  ELOCUTION, 


149 


should  also  be  marked,  else  we  might 
argue  that  we  have  in  the  reading  an 
intimation  that  Bassanio  is  a  polyga- 
mist.  In  the  third  line  I  should  not 
emphasize  say  or  speak.  By  empha- 
sizing bid  in  the  fourth  line  instead  of 
her,  we  spoil  the  rhythm  of  an  other- 
wise perfect  line.  There  can  be  no 
doubt,  I  think,  that  Shakespeare  em- 
phasized her. 

^    Repent  not  you  that  you  shall  lose  your  friend , 
And  he  repents  not  that  Yiq  pays  your  debt ; 
For^  if  the  Jew  do  cut  but  deep  enough, 
I'll  pay  it  instantly  with  all  my  heart. 

Our  author's  reading  of  the  first 
three  of  these  four  lines  seems  to  me 
to  be  very  bad  indeed.  In  fact,  I  don't 
see  how  it  could  easily  be  worse.  The 
most  offensive  thing  in  it  is  the  empha- 
sis on  and  the  pause  after  for.  The 
emphasizing  of  the  ors  and  j^r's,  and 
the  particles  generally,  is  a  character- 
istic of  that  species  of  reader  known 


I50  THE  ESSENTIALS 

in  stage  parlance  as  the  scene  chewer. 
There  is  not  a  syllable  in  the  four  lines 
that  should  be  touched  more  lightly 
than  the  first  syllable  of  the  third  line. 
I  should  read  these  lines  thus : 

Repent  vioX.you  that  you  shall  lose  yo\xr  friend ^ 
And  he  repents  not  that  h.^  pays  your  debt ; 
For  if  the  Jew  do  cut  but  deep  enough, 
1*11  pay  it  instantly  with  all  my  heart. 


XI. 


"  There  cannot  be  two  right  ways  to  read  a  sen- 
tence any  more  than  there  can  be  two  right  solutions 
to  a  mathematical  problem.  There  can  be  only  one 
reading  that  fully  brings  out  the  thought." 

Canon  Fleming  proceeds,  in  his 
*' Artof  Reading  and  Speaking/*  which 
he  dedicates,  *'  to  all  who  desire  to  be 
cultured  readers  and  speakers  of  our 
mother  tongue,"  to  mark  the  emphatic 
words  in  the  Trial  Scene  of  "  The 
Merchant  of  Venice"  in  this  wise: 

Bassanio — Antonio,  I  am  married  to  a  wife 
Which  is  as  dear  to  me  as  life  itself; 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


151 


But  life  itself,  my  wife,  and  alt  the  worlds 
Are  not  with  me  esteemed  above  thy  life; 
I  would  lose  all,  ay,  sacrifice  them  a;// 
Here  to  MeV  devil  to  deliver  jj/^/^. 

It  is  a  mistake,  it  seems  to  me,  to 
mark  wt/e  in  the  first  line  for  emphasis, 
as  I  do  not  think  that  more  should  be 
made  of  it  than  of  married.  Not  life 
but  itself  m  the  second  line  is  the  em- 
phatic word.  Words  ending  in  self 
are  used  in  most  cases  for  emphasis 
only;  they  seldom  add  to  the  thought. 
Commonly  the  word  preceding  should 
also  be  emphasized,  but  here  we  have 
an  exception  ;  the  emphasis  on  itself 
suffices.  If  the  not  in  the  fourth  line 
contradicted  a  preceding  affirmative, 
it  would  be  proper  to  emphasize  it. 
The  emphatic  words  in  this  line  are 
esteemedy  thy,  and  life.  The  first  of 
the  three,  however,  may  safely  be  left 
to  take  care  of  itself.  Why  emphasize 
this  ?  There  is  no  question  of  any 
other   devil.     Deliver^  not  you^  is  the 


1 5  2  THE  ESSENTIALS 

emphatic  word.  Put  any  word  we 
please  in  the  place  of  deliver — rescue 
or  release,  for  example — and  we  find  it 
naturally  gets  the  emphasis,  I  should 
mark  this  speech  thus  : 

Antonio,  I  am  married  to  a  wife 
Which  is  as  dear  to  me  as  life  itself; 
But  life  itself,  my  wifey  and  all  the  worlds 
Are  not  with  me  esteemed  above  thy  life; 
I  would  lose  all,  ay,  sacrifice  them  «//, 
Here  to  this  devil  to  deliver  you. 
Portia — Your  wife  would  give  you  little  thanks 
If  she  were  by  to  hear  you  make  the  offer. 

Neither  wife,  little,  nor  hear  should 
I  emphasize,  but  I  should  emphasize 
tha7tks.  If  we  had  not  the  last  three 
words  of  the  second  line,  hear  would 
get  the  emphasis  that  now  goes  to 
offer. 

GratiaNO — /  have  a  wife  whom  I  protest  I  love . 
I  would  she  were  in  heaven,  so  she  could 
Entreat  some  power  to  change  this  currish  Jew. 

In  these  three  lines  our  author  marks 
ten  words  for  emphasis ;  I  should  mark 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


153 


six, — the  first  and  the  third  /,  heaven^ 
change^  currish  ^nd/ew. 

NerissA. — 'Tis  well yoM  offer  it  behind h^t  back; 
The  wish  would  make  else  an  unquiet  home. 

Here  again,  I  should  mark  only  half 
as  many  words  for  emphasis  as  our 
author — back,  else  and  home.  Else,  to 
my  thinking,  is  the  most  emphatic 
word  in  the  speech.  With  the  empha- 
sis on  well  I  should  not  quarrel. 

Shylock. — These  be  the  Christian  husbands  !    I  have  a 
daughter  ; 
Would  diny  of  the  stock  of  Barabbas 
Had  been  her  husband  rather  than  a  Christian  ! 
We  trifle  time:  \ pray  ih^^ pursue  sentence. 

In  the  first  line  I  should  emphasize 
neither  husbands  nor  /.  Our  author 
emphasizes  /,  possibly  because  Bas- 
sanio  and  Gratiano  have  said  they 
have  wives.  If  this  be  his  reason, 
which  is  the  only  reason  I  can  see,  I 
do  not  think  it  sufficient.  In  the 
second  line,  I  should  not  emphasize 
either   would  or   stock.      Nor   in   the 


154  THE  ESSENTIALS 

third  line  should  I  emphasize  husband. 
The  caesura,  as  is  frequently  the  case, 
makes  the  word  sufficiently  prominent. 

Portia. — K  pound oi  that  same  merchant s  flesh  is  thine. 

The  court  awards  it  and  the  law  doth  give  it. 
Shylock. — Most  rightful  judge, 

Portia. — And  you  must  cut  this  flesh  from  off  his 
breast: 
The  law  allows  it  and  the  court  awards  it. 
Shylock. — Most   learned  judge  I     A  sentence  !     Come^ 
prepare! 

In  the  first  line,  I  should  not  empha- 
size merchant's;  nor  in  the  fourth  line, 
flesh.  Judge  I  should  not  emphasize 
in  either  instance ;  all  the  emphasis 
should  go  to  the  adjectives. 

Portia. — i.    Tarry  a  little  :    There  is  so?nething  else, 

2.  This  bond — doth  give  thee  here — no  jot 

of  blood; 

3.  The  words  expressly  are  3.  pound  oi  flesh  : 

4.  Then   take   thy   bond ;    take   thou   thy 

pou7id  oi  flesh  ; 

5.  But,  in  the  cutting  it  if  thou  dost  shed 

6.  One  drop  of  Christian  bloody  thy  lands  and 


7.  Are,  by  the  laws  of  Venice,  confiscate 

8.  Unto  the  state  of  Venice. 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


155 


In  a  foot-note  our  author  says : 
'*  This  passage  to  be  read  very  slowly 
and  deliberately/'  Herein  I  think  his 
dramatic  instinct  is  greatly  at  fault. 
Read  as  he  advises,  the  speech  would 
not  produce  half  its  possible  effect. 
Nor  would  it  produce  half  its  possible 
effect  emphasized  as  he  emphasizes  it ; 
It  would  be  wholly  wanting  In  climax, 
which  it  is  far  from  wanting  If  the  last 
two  lines  are  properly  spoken. 

Neither  little  nor  something  In  the 
first  line  should  have  any  emphasis 
whatever ;  all  the  words  but  tarry  and 
else  should  be  gone  over  quite  trip- 
pingly. Then  the  first  six  words  of 
the  second  line  should  be  spoken  In 
like  manner,  a  pause  being  made  after 
them  of  sufficient  length  to  enable  the 
reader  to  take  a  full,  deep  breath, 
which  should  be  mainly  expended  on 
the  word  blood — the  turning  point  in 
Shylock's  fortunes.    In  the  fourth  line, 


156  THE  ESSENTIALS 

I  should  emphasize  take  In  both  clauses 
very  strongly,  but  should  not  empha- 
size pound.  In  the  fifth  line,  I  should 
ignore  the  first  comma,  since  observ- 
ing it  retards  the  movement  necessary 
to  produce  the  effect  the  speech  should, 
and  always  will,  produce  if  properly 
handled.  Shed^  one  and  Christian 
should  not  be  emphasized.  Emphasiz- 
ing these  words  takes  from  the  snap, 
the  movement,  the  earnestness — in  a 
word  from  the  naturalness — of  the  de- 
livery, which  always  has  been,  and  for- 
evermore  will  be,  the  only  legitimate 
thing  to  consider  in  making  one*s  elo- 
cution effective.  But  it  is  in  the  last 
two  lines  that  our  author's  reading  of 
this  speech  is  singularly  weak.  He 
leaves  unmarked  the  two  most  em- 
phatic words  in  the  whole  eight  lines, 
the  two  words  that  the  skillful  Portia 
specially  depends  on  for  her  climax, 
and  for  the  round  of  applause  that  she 


OF  ELOCUTION.  157 

IS  sure  to  get — confiscate  and  state. 
To  emphasize  laws  in  the  seventh  line 
would  be  to  suggest  a  meaning  not  in- 
tended. The  whole  clause  should  be 
tripped  over  lightly.  Before  and  after 
the  word  confiscate,  the  reader  should 
take  a  full  breath ;  the  first  he  should 
expend  on  confiscate,  the  second  almost 
wholly  on  state.  It  matters  little 
whether  the  last  two  words  are  heard 
or  not.  Here  is  the  way  I  should 
mark  the  speech : 

Tarry  a  little;  there  is  something  else. 
This  bond  doth  give  thee  here — no  jot  of  blood. 
The  words  expressly  are — 2i pound  oi  flesh. 
Then  take  thy  bond  ;  take  thou  thy  pound  oi  fleshy 
But  in  the  cutting 'w,  if  thou  dost  shed 
One  drop  of  Christian  bloody  thy  lands  diud  goods 
Are,  by  the  laws  of  Venice,  confiscate — 
Unto  the  state  of  Venice. 
GrATIANO. — O  upright  judge  I     Mark,  Jew  \     A  learn/a 


To  emphasize  so  much  is  to  empha- 
size nothing  at  all.     To  my  thinking, 


1 5  8  THE  ESSENTIALS 

upright,    marky    and   learnM  are   the 
only  emphatic  words. 

Shylock. — Is  that  the  law? 

Portia. —  Thyself  sYidM  see  the  act. 

For,  as  thou  nrgest  justice,  be  assured 
Thou   shalt   have  justice,  more  than  thou 
desirest, 

I  should  ignore  the  comma  after  y^r, 
should  emphasize  urgest,  should  trip 
lightly  over  assured^  and  should  not 
emphasize  justice  in  the  third  line. 
Urge  and  have  seem  to  me  to  stand  in 
direct  contradistinction. 

Gratiano. — 0  learned  judge  !     Mark,  ]gw\     A  learned 
judge  ! 

Three  words  only  should  I  empha- 
size in  this  line — learnid,  marky  and 
learned, 

Shylock. — I  take  his  offer,  then  ;  pay  the  bond  thrice. 

And  let  the  Christian  go, 
Bassanio. — Here  is  the  money, 

I  should  certainly  not  emphasize 
bondy  nor  should  I  mark  anything  in 
Bassanio's  speech  for  emphasis. 


OF  ELOCUTION. 


159 


P0RTlA,--5'^/if/ 

The  Jew  shall  h.2i^^  all  justice  ;  soft!  no  haste  ! 
He  shall  have  nothing  but  ihQ  penalty » 

Nothingy  not  but,  is  the  word  to  em- 
phasize in  this  last  line.  Indeed  noth- 
ing is  the  most  emphatic  word  in  the 
speech. 

Gratiano. — O  Jew!   an  upright  judge!     a  learned 
judge I 

The  two  adjectives  seem  to  me  to  be 
the  only  words  that  should  be  made  at 
all  emphatic. 


l6o  THE  ESSENTIALS 


XII. 

Incorrect  emphasis  always  preverts  the  sense,  and 
to  the  hearer  it  is  like  directing  a  traveler  in  the 
wrong  road. — Bronson. 

Portia. — 

1.  Therefore, /r^/^r^  thee  to  cut  off  the  flesh, 

2.  ShedX\io}x  no  blood;  nor  cut  thou  less  nor  morcy 

3.  ^Viljust  z.  pound  oi  flesh.     If  thou  tak'st  more 

4.  Or  less  than  z.  just  pound — be  it  but  so  much 

5.  As  make  it  light  or  heavy ^  in  the  substance^ 

6.  On  the  division  of  the  twentieth  part 

7.  Of  one  poor  scruple  ;  nay,  if  the  scale  do  turn 

8.  But  in  the  estimation  of  a  hair — 

9.  Thou  diest  and  all  thy  goods  are  confiscate. 

If  I  were  to  mark  any  word  in  the 
first  line  of  this  speech  for  emphasis,  it 
would  be  the  first.  The  words  our 
author  marks  should  not,  it  seems  to 
me,  be  made  at  all  emphatic.  The  ef- 
fect of  the  comma  after  therefore  em- 
phasizes it  sufficiently,  which  was 
doubtless  our  author's  thought  when 
he  left  it  unitalicized. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  i6i 

In  the  second  line  I  should  empha- 
size only  three  words — blood,  less,  and 
more.  The  emphasizing  of  shed  and 
cut  seems  to  me  utterly  indefensible. 
Here,  it  seems  to  me,  is  as  good  an 
example  as  we  could  well  have  of  that 
unreasonable,  trip-hammer  delivery 
that  has  brought  the  very  name  of 
elocution  into  disfavor.  To  read  after 
this  fashion,  a  modicum  of  intelligence 
and  a  pair  of  stilts  for  the  voice  are 
the  sum  of  all  that  is  required. 

In  the  third  line,  in  addition  to  the 
words  italicized,  I  should  emphasize 
fieshy  and  that,  too,  much  more  strong- 
ly than  any  other  word  in  the  line.  The 
reason:  Shakespeare,  I  take  it,  with 
the  words,  *'  But  just  a  pound  of  flesh,'* 
imposes  on  Portia  the  task  of  making 
supremely  prominent  a  very  important 
fact  that  does  not  appear  in  the  naked 
words,  namely,  the  fact  that  this  pound 
of  flesh  must  be  made  up  of  flesh  only 


l62  THE  ESSENTIALS 

— no  blood,  no  bone,  nothing  but  flesh. 
This  is  the  letter  of  the  bond;  the 
spirit  of  the  bond,  it  is  conceded,  Portia 
studiously  ignores.  Now  this  thought, 
which  adds  greatly  to  the  import  and 
effectiveness  of  the  half  dozen  words, 
can  only  be  brought  out  by  a  peculiar 
and  very  strong  emphasis  oxi  flesh. 

In  the  fourth  line,  I  should  not  em- 
phasize y/^i*/,  so  or  mucky  but  I  should 
emphasize  potmd.  The  word  justy  it 
will  be  perceived,  can  be  dispensed 
with  without  any  loss  to  the  thought 
or  to  the  effect. 

The  most  emphatic  word  in  the  fifth, 
sixth,  and  seventh  lines  is  divisiofiy 
which,  it  would  seem,  our  author  would 
not  have  us  emphasize.  The  thought, 
if  I  do  not  err,  is  this:  ''  Makes  it  eith- 
er light  or  heavy  in  the  whole,  or  even 
in  apart,  of  the  twentieth  of  a  scruple,*' 
which  appears  only  when  division  is 
strongly  emphasized. 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 63 

In  the  seventh  and  eighth  lines,  I 
should  not  emphasize  scale,  turfiy  but  or 
estimation;  pooVy  however,  I  should 
emphasize  as  strongly  as  the  words  be- 
fore and  after  it. 

There  might  be  something  in  the 
context  that  would  justify  the  em- 
phasis on  all  in  the  ninth  line;  as  it  is, 
however,  the  emphatic  word  is  goods. 

GrATIANO. — A  second  Daniel!     A  Daniel y  Jew  ! 
NoWy  injidely  I  have  thee  on  the  hip. 

In  the  first  line,  I  should  emphasize 
neither  second  nor  Jew.  If  Gratiano,  in 
the  second  line,  would  intimate  that 
the  Jew  has  had  his  opponents  on  the 
hip,  which  I  think  is  the  traditional 
rendering,  he  should  not  emphasize 
hip;  if  this  be  not  his  thought,  he 
should  trip  over  thee  and  emphasize 
hip.  In  neither  case,  should  both  words 
be  emphasized.  If  Gratiano  would 
taunt   Shylock   with  being  an  infidel, 


164  T^^  ESSENTIALS 

the  word  infidel s\io\}\di  be  emphasized, 
not  otherwise. 

Portia.—  Why  doth  the  Jew  pause  ?      Take  l\iy  for- 
feiture, 
Shylock. — Give  me  my  principal  ?ind  let  me  go. 
Bassanio. — I  have  it  ready  for  thee.     Here  it  is. 
Portia. — He  hath  refused  it  in  the  open  court. 

He  shall  have  merely  justice ^  and  his  dond, 
Gratiano. — A  Daniely  still  say  I  ;  a  second  Daniel! 

I  thank  thee,  Jew,  for  teaching  me  that  word, 
Shylock. — Shall  I  not  have  barely  m.y  principal? 
Portia. — Thou  shalt  have  nothinghut  the  forfeiture. 

To  be  so  taken  at  thy  perils  Jew. 
Shylock. — Why  then,  the  Devil  give  him  good  oi  it! 

I'll  stay  no  longer  question. 

My  marking  of  these  eight  speeches 
would  not  differ  materially  from  that 
of  our  author.  Why  in  the  first  speech, 
that  and  word  in  the  fifth,  and  good 
in  the  last  I  should,  probably,  have 
left  unmarked.  In  marking  the  em- 
phatic words  of  prose  or  verse,  it  is 
better  to  err  on  the  side  of  marking 
too  few  words  than  on  the  side  of  too 
many.  I  am  by  no  means  sure,  for 
example,  that    as    devil,  in    the    last 


OF  ELOCUTION.  165 

speech,  is  so  very  much  more  emphatic 
than  any  other  word  in  the  speech, 
the  italicizing  of  the  one  word  would 
not  suffice. 

Portia. 

1.  Tarry ^  Jew: 

2.  The  law  hathyef  another  hold  on  you. 

3.  It  is  enacted  in  the  laws  of  Venice^ 

4.  If  it  be  proved  against  an  alien, 

5.  That  by  direct  or  indirect  attempts, 

6.  He  seek  the  life  of  any  citizen. 

7.  The  party ^  'gainst  the  which  he  doth  contrive^ 

8.  Shall  j^/^^  one  ^fl!//^  his  ^<7^^j.'  the  other  half 

9.  Comes  to  the  privy  coffer  of  the  state; 
to.  And  the  offender's  life  lies  in  the  mercy 

11.  Of  the  Duke  only  'gainst  all  other  voice, 

12.  In  VfYiich.  predicament y  I  say,  thou  stand st, 

13.  For  it  appears,  by  manifest  proceeding, 

14.  That,  indirectly,  and  directly  too, 

15.  Thou  hast  contrived  2i^2L.inst  the  very  life 

16.  Of  the  defendant,  and  thou  hast  incurred 

17.  The  danger  formerly  by  me  rehearsed; 

18.  Down,  therefore,  and  beg  mercy  of  the  Duke, 

In  this  speech  our  author  empha- 
sizes fifty  words.  I  should  emphasize 
only  thirty-two,  twenty-nine  that  he 
emphasizes  and  three  that  he  does 
not     emphasize — 'gainst    and    which^ 


1 66  THE  ESSENTIALS 

in  the  seventh  line,  and  formerly,  in 
the  seventeenth.  I,  then,  so  far  as 
emphasis  is  concerned,  should  read  the 
speech  essentially  thus  : 

1.  Tarry ^  Jew: 

2.  The  law  hath  yet  another  hold  on  you. 

3.  It  is  enacted  in  the  lazus  of  Venice, 

4.  If  it  be  proved  against  an  alien, 

5.  That  by  direct  or  indirect  attempts, 

6.  He  seek  the  life  of  any  citizen^ 

7.  The  party  Against  the  which  he  doth  contrive, 

8.  Shall  seize  one  half 'his  goods  :   the  other  half 

9.  Comes  to  to  the  privy  coffer  of  the  state  ; 

10.  And  the  offender's  life  lies  in  the  mercy 

11.  Of  the  Duke  only,  'gainst  all  other  voice, 

12.  In  which  predicament,  I  say,  thou  stand* st, 

13.  For  it  appears,  by  manifest  proceeding, 

14.  That  indirectly  and  directly  too, 

15.  Thou  hast  contrived  against  the  very  life 

16.  Of  the  defendant,  and  thou  hast  incurred 

17.  The  didLVigQ^r  formerly  by  me  rehearsed; 

18.  Down,  therefore,  and  beg  mercy  of  the  Duk^, 

There  is  a  point  of  law  in  this 
speech,  which  none  of  the  many  Por- 
tias I  have  seen  seemed  to  see.  Not 
even  Miss  Terry,  whom  I  have  seen 
three  times  in  the  part,  seems  to  see 


OF  ELOCUTION.  167 

It.  If  she  does  see  it,  she,  like  the 
others,  fails  to  make  it  appear,  which, 
at  the  least  is  very  good  evidence  that 
she  does  not  see  it.  If  we  look  at  the 
language  at  all  closely,  it  readily  ap- 
pears that  under  the  Venetian  law  it 
was  one  thing  if  an  alien  sought  the 
life  of  an  alien,  or  a  citizen  sought  the 
life  of  a  citizen,  and  quite  another 
thing  if  an  alien  sought  the  life  of  a 
citizen.  Here,  as  ever,  if  one  would 
read  well,  the  first  condition  is  to 
know  what  the  language  means. 

It  will  be  seen  that  in  the  seventh 
line,  our  author  emphasizes  party  and 
that  I  do  not.  The  thought  is  brought 
out,  not  by  emphasizing  the  noun,  but 
by  emphasizing  the  qualifying,  limit- 
ing, adjectival  clause  that  follows  it. 
Would  anyone  think  of  emphasizing 
the  noun,  if  we  resolve  the  limiting 
clause  into  one  word  thus :  The  en- 
dangered, or  threatened  party;    or  say, 


l68  THE  ESSENTIALS 

the  party  threatened?  It  is  really 
thoughts  that  we  emphasize,  not 
words ;  and  when  a  clause  expresses 
an  emphatic  thought,  a  thought 
that  perhaps  might  be  expressed  with 
a  single  word,  the  stress  is  about 
equal  on  the  principal  words,  the  last 
word,  usually,  if  we  are  true  to  nature, 
being  made  slightly  the  most  promi- 
nent. In  the  reading, /^r/jj/ becomes 
quite  prominent,  not  however  because 
we  emphasize  it,  but  because  of  the 
rhetorical  pause  that  naturally  follows 
it.  Our  author's  comma  should  not  be 
there ;  we  should  not  separate  nouns 
from  words  or  clauses  that  limit  or 
qualify  them.  The  pause  after  party 
is  purely  rhetorical. 

Students  of  the  art  of  reading  will, 
I  think,  find  it  interesting,  and  per- 
haps profitable,  to  study  this  speech 
carefully.  Though  they  may  not 
agree  with   either  Canon   Fleming,  or 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 69 

with  me,  a  careful  study  of  the  speech 
should  tend  to  convince  them,  if  not 
already  convinced,  that  to  read  well 
one  must  do  more  than  simply  famil- 
iarize one*s-self  with  the  words. 

XIII. 


If  we  would  read  well,  we  must  learn  how. — Canon 
Fleming. 

There  are  those  who  think  elocution  worthless,  be- 
cause they  have  not  studied  it  ;  and  they  will  not 
study  it,  because  they  think  it  worthless. — Alfred 
Ayres. 

Our  English  author  continues  thus : 

Duke. — That  thou  shalt  see  the  difference  oi  ours-^ixiX. 
\  pardon  thee  thy  life  before  thou  ask  it. 
For  half  thy  wealth,  it  is  Antonio's  ; 
The  other  half  corals  to  ih^  general  sia^tQ 
Which  humbleness  may  drive  into  a  fine. 

In  the  marking  of  this  speech,  our 
author  does  not  appear  at  his  best. 
Why  emphasize  our  ?  There  is  no 
question  of  difference  between  any  but 
the  Duke  and  the  Jew.     The  thought 


1 70  THE  ESSENTIALS 

being  the  difference  between  us,  we 
have  only  to  emphasize  difference  and 
spirit  to  bring  it  out. 

In  the  second  line,  I  see  but  two  em- 
phatic words — life  and  ask. 

In  the  third  line,  I  should  emphasize 
wealth  and  Anto7iids,  If  a  discussion  as 
to  what  should  be  done  with  Shylock's 
fortune  had  taken  place  and  this  were 
the  resulting  decision,  our  author's  em- 
phasis would  be  correct.  Portia  simply 
tells  what  the  law  is ;  no  discussion  is 
even  suggested. 

Why  emphasize  ^^;^^r^/ in  the  fourth 
line  ?  There  is  no  question  anywhere 
of  any  private  state.  Indeed,  general 
adds  nothing  to  the  thought ;  it's  used 
only  to  pad  out  the  line.  Being  used, 
it  may  be  said  to  coalesce  with  state  in 
expressing  what  state  would  fully  ex- 
press unaided,  and  thus  come  in  for  a 
sort  of  subordinate  emphasis  ;  the 
strong  emphasis  properly  goes  to  the 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 71 

noun.     I  see  no  reason  for  emphasizing 
half. 

If  the  Duke  means  to  say  in  the  last 
line,  Which  humbleness  mayy  possibly, 
which  I  think  he  does,  then  mayy  by  a 
good  deal,  is  probably  the  most  em- 
phatic word  in  the  whole  speech.  I 
should  italicize y?;^^. 

Portia. — Ay,  for  the  state;  not  for  Antonio. 

In  the  last  clause,  Antonio,  if  I  do 
not  err,  is  the  word  to  emphasize. 

Shylock. — Nay,   take  my  life  and   all;  pardon    not 
that : 
You  take  my  house  when  you  do  take  the  prop 
That  doth  sustain  my  house  ;  you  take  my  life 
When  you  do  take  the  means  whereby  I  live. 

The  emphasis  on  take,  in  the  first 
line,  is  indefensible.  If  the  Duke  had 
said  Shylock^s  life  should  be  taken, 
Shylock  could  say,  for  example.  Very 
well,  proceed,  take  my  life.  As  it  is, 
Shylock  virtually  says  this :  If  you 
take  my  goods,  take  my  life  and  all. 


1 72  THE  ESSENTIALS 

I  should  mark  the  last  words  of  the 
last  line  thus :  means — whereby — I- — live. 

It  is  more  difficult  to  realize  the  pos- 
sibilities of  this  speech  than  it  is  to 
realize  the  possibilities  of  any  other 
speech  in  the  whole  play.  It  is  doubt- 
ful whether  four  lines  could  be  found 
anywhere  that  are  susceptible  of  being 
made  more  pathetic. 

Portia. — What  mercy  can  you  render  him,  Antonio  ? 
Gratiano. — A     halter     gratis  ;     nothing    else^    for 
Heaven^ s  sake. 

I  can  see  no  reason  for  emphasizing 
either  mercy  or  nothing. 

Antonio. — 

1.  So  please  my  lord  the  Duke  and  all  the  courts 

2.  To  quit  the  fine  for  one- half  oi  his  goods, 

3.  I  am  content,  so  he  will  let  me  have 

4.  The  other  half  in  use,  to  render  it, 

5.  Upon  his  death  unto  the  gentleman 

6.  Th.dillSiX.Qly  stole  his  daughter  ; 

7.  And  that  he  do  record  a  gift, 

8.  Here  int  he  court,  of  all  he  dies  possessed 

9.  Unto  his  son,  Lorenzo,  and  his  daughter. 

True,    the   Duke   is   a   part   of   the 


OF  ELOCUTION.  1 73 

court;  but  that  hardly  justifies  the 
author's  reading.  The  language  means 
no  more  than :  If  it  please  the  Duke 
and  the  court,  hence  court  and  not  all 
is  the  word  to  emphasize. 

I  should  mark  no  word  for  emphasis 
in  the  second  line,  but  in  reading  the 
line  I  should  always  take  out  one  and 
of,  since  with  them  the  line  is  prose, 
while  without  them  its  rhythm  is  per- 
fect. Neither  thought  nor  idiom  suffers 
by  the  omission. 

Half,  in  the  fourth  line ;  stole,  in  the 
sixth,  and  record,  in  the  seventh,  are 
words  I  should  not  emphasize.  If  I 
fully  understand  what  Antonio  would 
say,  the  adverbial  clause.  Here  in  the 
court,  must  be  emphasized  in  order  to 
make  him  say  it. 

Duke. — He  shall  do  this,  or  else  I  do  recant 
The  J>ari/on  that  I  late  fronounc/d  here. 

Were  I  to  mark  this  speech  for  em- 


174  THE  ESSENTIALS 

phasis,  I  should  mark  only  one  word — 
the  first  do. 

Portia. — Art  thou  contented^  Jew  ?   *  What  dost  thou 

say  ? 
S  H  YLOCK.  — I-^am — content, 
Portia. — Clerk,  draw  a  deed  of  gift. 
Shylock. — I  pray  you,   give   me  leave  to  go  from 
hence  ; 
I  am  not  well.     Send  the  deed  after  me 
And  I  will  sign  it. 
Duke. — Get  thee  ^^one^  but  do  it. 

The  wAai  in  Portia^s  speech  is  not 
emphatic ;  nor  does  the  leave  in  Shy- 
lock's  speech  seem  to  me  to  be  em- 
phatic. I  should  read  :  I  am — noi — 
well.  Then,  I  should  emphasize  qfler, 
sign,  and  do. 

This  is  as  far  as  Canon  Fleming 
goes  in  *'  The  Merchant  of  Venice/* 
and  here  I  reluctantly  take  leave  of 
him. 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 

AN     INITIAL    FINE    OF    25    CENTS 

rjJ'i'.f^V^^^^^^"  ''°''  "^^"-""6  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 

oCerdu^    ™    ""^    ^^    ^"^    =^^^^^"    ^*^ 


MAn 


2   1933 


^^^    B    1933 


YB  01967 


10079.6 


